I’ve been pointing out for several years that failure of sub-Saharan Africans to lower their fertility to sustainable levels the way almost everybody on Earth has done presents humanity with quite likely the single biggest challenge facing the world in the 21st Century.

Today, the New York Times is attempting to spin Africa’s fertility-induced catastrophe as the fault of white people for emitting carbon. They go to Niger, the red spot on the fertility map above.

AGADEZ, Niger — The world dismisses them as economic migrants. The law treats them as criminals who show up at a nation’s borders uninvited. Prayers alone protect them on the journey across the merciless Sahara.

But peel back the layers of their stories and you find a complex bundle of trouble and want that prompts the men and boys of West Africa to leave home, endure beatings and bribes, board a smuggler’s pickup truck and try to make a living far, far away.

They do it because the rains have become so fickle, the days measurably hotter, the droughts more frequent and more fierce, making it impossible to grow enough food on their land.

Or maybe because their cousins in Paris post enviable photos of themselves on Facebook.

Some go to the cities first, only to find jobs are scarce. Some come from countries ruled by dictators, like Gambia, whose longtime ruler recently refused to accept the results of an election he lost.

His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa, Commander in Chief of The Armed Forces and Chief Custodian of the Sacred Constitution of the Gambia (and also a Kentucky colonel and a Nebraska admiral), alleged Russian hacking. No just kidding:

Although he initially conceded defeat, on 9 December 2016, he rejected the result citing “unacceptable abnormalities”.[5] He subsequently announced he had annulled the result, pending a new vote.[6] He then filed a petition with the Supreme Court of the Gambia to contest the result.[7]

Sounds like if this recount thing doesn’t work out for him, he could get a job with Jill Stein. Or, judging from his witch-hunting skills, with the SPLC. From the NYT in 2009:

The president, it seems, had become concerned about witches in this country of mango trees, tropical scrub, dirt roads, innumerable police checkpoints and Atlantic coastline frequented by sun-seeking European tourists mostly unaware of the activities at nearby Mile 2 State Central Prison, where many opponents of the regime are taken.

To the accompaniment of drums, and directed by men in red tunics bedecked with mirrors and cowrie shells, dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Gambians were taken from their villages and driven by bus to secret locations. There they were forced to drink a foul-smelling concoction that made them hallucinate, gave them severe stomach pains, induced some to try digging a hole in a tiled floor, made others try climbing up a wall and in some cases killed them, according to the villagers themselves and Amnesty International.

The objective was to root out witches, evil sorcerers who were harming the country, the villagers were told. Terrified, dozens of other people fled into the bush or across the border into Senegal to escape the dragnet, villagers said, leaving whole regions deserted. Amnesty estimates that at least six people died after being forced to drink the potion, whose composition is unknown.

Back to 2016′s article:

Others come from countries crawling with jihadists, like Mali.

Clearly, Europe needs more immigrants from countries crawling with jihadists, like Mali.

This journey has become a rite of passage for West Africans of his generation. The slow burn of climate change makes subsistence farming, already risky business in a hot, arid region, even more of a gamble. Pressures on land and water fuel clashes, big and small. Insurgencies simmer across the region, prompting United States counterterrorism forces to keep watch from a base on the outskirts of Agadez.

This year, more than 311,000 people have passed through Agadez on their way to either Algeria or Libya, and some onward to Europe, according to the International Organization for Migration. The largest numbers are from Niger and its West African neighbors, including Mr. Bokoum’s home, Mali.

Scholars of migration count people like Mr. Bokoum among the millions who could be displaced around the world in coming decades as rising seas, widening deserts and erratic weather threaten traditional livelihoods. For the men who pour through Agadez, these hardships are tangled up with intense economic, political and demographic pressures.

“Climate change on its own doesn’t force people to move but it amplifies pre-existing vulnerabilities,” said Jane McAdam, an Australian law professor who studies the trend. They move when they can no longer imagine a future living off their land — or as she said, “when life becomes increasingly intolerable.”

But many of these people fall through the cracks of international law. The United Nations 1951 refugee convention applies only to those fleeing war and persecution, and even that treaty’s obligation to offer protection is increasingly flouted by many countries wary of foreigners. …

As Mr. Idi, 33, led me through his fields, he recalled hearing stories of what Chana looked like before a great drought swept across the Sahel in the 1970s and 1980s. The village was encircled by trees, he was told.

Back then, like most villagers, his father had a cow and plenty of sheep. … Most of the trees are gone, they were cut for firewood. …

Maybe deforestation due to population growth leads to desertification?

This long article mentions fertility in one paragraph and then immediately pivots back to climate change:

Sub-Saharan Africa is in the throes of a population boom, which means that people have to grow more food precisely at a time when climate change is making it all the more difficult. Fertility rates remain higher than in other parts of the world, and Niger has the highest in the entire world: Women bear more than seven children on average.

Once every three years, according to scientists from the Famine Early Warning Systems Network, or FEWS Net, Niger faces food insecurity, or a lack of adequate food to eat. Hunger here is among the worst in the world: About 45 percent of Niger’s children under 5 suffer from chronic malnutrition.

Meanwhile, in what is already one of the hottest places on Earth, it has gotten steadily hotter: by 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1975, Fews Net has found. …

Meanwhile, the population of Niger has grown from 5.2 million in 1975 to 19.9 million in 2015. But don’t think about the 14.7 million more people, think about the 0.7 more degrees.

Mohamed Diallo, a Senegalese manager of the compound, blamed Western countries for spewing carbon into the atmosphere, and he was skeptical of their leaders’ promises to curb emissions.

“The big powers are polluting and creating problems for us,” he said. He was appalled that Africans trying to go to Europe were treated like criminals, when Europeans in Africa were treated like kings.

Something must be done, but definitely not suggesting that Africans should use birth control. You don’t suffer from Fear of a Black Planet, do you?

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

For those of us who "know" -- that picture and the future it represents are truly horrifying.

As somebody said in ythe comments section the last time Steve posted an article on this topic.....say goodbye to Africa's big game animals. Get as many as possible into zoos.....you won't find them in Africa in forty yrs

Actually - until a monumental act of sheer stupidity and ignorance in 1968 - the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention applied to persons of European descent only.
Strangely enough, Turkey still cleaves to the original definition.

“Meanwhile, in what is already one of the hottest places on Earth, it has gotten steadily hotter: by 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1975,”

How many Blacks in Africa actually complain that the weather there is so hot that it makes it unlivable for them? I have never heard of an African immigrant who moved to Europe or North America because we have milder cooler weather compared to Africa. They are leaving because Africa is a 3rd World shithole, not because Africa lacks 4 distinct seasons.

My hometown in upstate NY occasionally hosts (via leftist churchy people) migrants waiting to get into Canada. I remember a couple African brothers (real brothers, not "yo, brotha" brothers) who were f'ing miserable in the cold weather, brand new churchy-people-provided Sorel boots and huge anoraks notwithstanding. Some like it hot.

The official title used is His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa.[77] He is Commander in Chief of The Armed Forces and Chief Custodian of the Sacred Constitution of the Gambia.[78]

On 16 June 2015, a statement from the State House stated that President Jammeh should be addressed as "His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh Babili Mansa".[79] The title Babili Mansa, which the President decided to drop in December 2014, is a phrase in the Mandinka language that could be translated as either "Chief Bridge Builder" or "Conqueror of Rivers".[80][81] Two months before, he had already removed the title "Nasirul Deen", which had been conferred to him by the Gambia Supreme Islamic Council.[82]

Awards and honours[edit]

... He has received awards through the unrecognised higher education accreditation organisation the International Parliament for Safety and Peace, including a peace award,[87] the honorary title of Kentucky colonel[88] and the tongue-in-cheek award of Nebraska Admiral.[89][90][91][92] Jennifer Rae Hein, a spokeswoman for the Governor of Nebraska, acknowledged that Jammeh was granted an admiralship in the Nebraska Navy,[93] but later stated "We regret that this individual has attempted to embellish a certificate for a Nebraska admiralship, claiming that it was a high honor bestowed upon him by the governor, when to the best of our knowledge, this person has no relationship with or ties to Nebraska."[94]

"He was working as sales manager at a gas company when he decided to travel to London to study and save up funds to start his own company. He is proud of an experience that included working as a security guard in an Argos store in Holloway Road, north London. “Life is a process, and the UK helped helped me to become the person I am today. Working 15 hours a day builds a man,” Barrow told Le Monde during the election campaign."

But many of these people fall through the cracks of international law.

Thank goodness for those "cracks" -- heaven forbid that we look at this rationally.

https://twitter.com/hateful_heretic/status/809529572119166981

Actually – until a monumental act of sheer stupidity and ignorance in 1968 – the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention applied to persons of European descent only.
Strangely enough, Turkey still cleaves to the original definition.

Africa’s fertility bomb is not a secret: as a friend of mine who worked there put it, “They f*** like rabbits!” That also explains their AIDS rates. And by the way, if you look at a map color-coded in proportion to the legal penalty for sodomy in Africa and one color-coded in proportion to HIV-positive rates, the two are very nearly complementary. But of course God forbid we should suggest that decriminalization of man-on-man sex is anything less than an essential step in the fight against AIDS: it would be sacrilegious to stop funneling the money I work my white arse off for so black homos in Africa can keep getting it in theirs with the promise of a cure.

Much of the spreading aids is also because of the way they have sex. The men insist on dry vaginal sex. If a woman is wet then she is a slut. Women actually rub dirt and sawdust on their vaginas to help dry it up before sex.

Anyway, as said before many, many times – more immigrants admitted to the west (here we are talking about potential billions if The Economist had its way, which it usually does) – means a shit-load more carbon emitted and consequent temperature increase.

I think we need more immigrants from jihadist-intensive countries, like Mali.

You’re in luck, this is the official United States immigration policy. What are the most “jihadist-intensive countries”? I would list Afghanistan, Syria, Somali, Sudan, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Gaza, and Lebanon. These are all highly favored nations and places in the Clintons’, Bush’s, and Obama’s immigration policies.

Globalist elites see demographic change as inevitable and worry about climate change, which they think can be altered by policy.

Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don’t worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy.

"Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don’t worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy."

I will start worrying about global warming if the temperature on Christmas eve in Calgary for example ever gets warm enough that you can walk the streets that day without wearing a coat, just a short sleeve shirt like as if you were celebrating Christmas in Phoenix.

I think the dumbest thing is that the environmentalists think climate change can be affected by public policy, but not by the public policy of building lots and lots of new nuclear power plants. And yet nuclear is the only extant human technology that is compatible with first world levels of energy consumption that doesn't emit CO2. It's almost as if for most of the climate people the penitence and self flagellation (by conserving energy and importing third world refugees) is more important than rapidly reducing CO2 emissions.

Also your observation is astute. It takes a strange worldview to think that reorganizing energy production away from the technologies in use in the entire developed world is an easier problem to solve than preventing third world migrants from moving to the developed world. Also isn't blocking that migration obligatory under the climate change mindset? We should have as few people living a first world lifestyle as possible until it can be lived without CO2 emissions.

Bizarrely, this feeds into the African/American Negro belief that whites have magical powers that they use to keep blacks poor–they actually manipulate the weather to the disadvantage of Africans/Negroes.

Globalist elites see demographic change as inevitable and worry about climate change, which they think can be altered by policy.

Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don't worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy.

“Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don’t worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy.”

I will start worrying about global warming if the temperature on Christmas eve in Calgary for example ever gets warm enough that you can walk the streets that day without wearing a coat, just a short sleeve shirt like as if you were celebrating Christmas in Phoenix.

"I will start worrying about global warming if the temperature on Christmas eve in Calgary for example ever gets warm enough that you can walk the streets that day without wearing a coat, just a short sleeve shirt like as if you were celebrating Christmas in Phoenix."

I would swap Calgary for Winnipeg, during winter Calgary can experience brief mild spells because of warm Pacific winds blowing over the Rockies called Chinooks. Similar to the Santa Ana winds in southern California, though in California the winds blows in from the inland desert area.

The article is 95% pure bullshit propaganda. The reference to the Gambia's dictator is particularly risible. Pol Pot he is not.

The president of Gambia sounds pretty entertaining:

The official title used is His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa.[77] He is Commander in Chief of The Armed Forces and Chief Custodian of the Sacred Constitution of the Gambia.[78]

On 16 June 2015, a statement from the State House stated that President Jammeh should be addressed as “His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh Babili Mansa”.[79] The title Babili Mansa, which the President decided to drop in December 2014, is a phrase in the Mandinka language that could be translated as either “Chief Bridge Builder” or “Conqueror of Rivers”.[80][81] Two months before, he had already removed the title “Nasirul Deen”, which had been conferred to him by the Gambia Supreme Islamic Council.[82]

Awards and honours[edit]

… He has received awards through the unrecognised higher education accreditation organisation the International Parliament for Safety and Peace, including a peace award,[87] the honorary title of Kentucky colonel[88] and the tongue-in-cheek award of Nebraska Admiral.[89][90][91][92] Jennifer Rae Hein, a spokeswoman for the Governor of Nebraska, acknowledged that Jammeh was granted an admiralship in the Nebraska Navy,[93] but later stated “We regret that this individual has attempted to embellish a certificate for a Nebraska admiralship, claiming that it was a high honor bestowed upon him by the governor, when to the best of our knowledge, this person has no relationship with or ties to Nebraska.”[94]

"Meanwhile, in what is already one of the hottest places on Earth, it has gotten steadily hotter: by 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1975,"

How many Blacks in Africa actually complain that the weather there is so hot that it makes it unlivable for them? I have never heard of an African immigrant who moved to Europe or North America because we have milder cooler weather compared to Africa. They are leaving because Africa is a 3rd World shithole, not because Africa lacks 4 distinct seasons.

“They[blacks in Africa] are leaving because Africa is a 3rd World shithole, not because Africa lacks 4 distinct seasons.”

They are leaving because they have turned Africa into a 3rd World shithole, not because Africa lacks 4 distinct seasons.

The official title used is His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa.[77] He is Commander in Chief of The Armed Forces and Chief Custodian of the Sacred Constitution of the Gambia.[78]

On 16 June 2015, a statement from the State House stated that President Jammeh should be addressed as "His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh Babili Mansa".[79] The title Babili Mansa, which the President decided to drop in December 2014, is a phrase in the Mandinka language that could be translated as either "Chief Bridge Builder" or "Conqueror of Rivers".[80][81] Two months before, he had already removed the title "Nasirul Deen", which had been conferred to him by the Gambia Supreme Islamic Council.[82]

Awards and honours[edit]

... He has received awards through the unrecognised higher education accreditation organisation the International Parliament for Safety and Peace, including a peace award,[87] the honorary title of Kentucky colonel[88] and the tongue-in-cheek award of Nebraska Admiral.[89][90][91][92] Jennifer Rae Hein, a spokeswoman for the Governor of Nebraska, acknowledged that Jammeh was granted an admiralship in the Nebraska Navy,[93] but later stated "We regret that this individual has attempted to embellish a certificate for a Nebraska admiralship, claiming that it was a high honor bestowed upon him by the governor, when to the best of our knowledge, this person has no relationship with or ties to Nebraska."[94]

Not being an American , I thought Nebraska was landlocked, – perhaps double or triple landlocked, as the saying goes.

Does the article even bother to mention any prediction models of what their agriculture would look like at 0.7 degrees cooler? I’m not going to bother to check, but I bet I know the answer. Shit article, shit journalist, shit newspaper.

The man made changes to their environment are caused buy themselves. Not good to cut all the trees down in any climate. That is what took down the Aztecs and other north and south American civilizations.

"Meanwhile, in what is already one of the hottest places on Earth, it has gotten steadily hotter: by 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1975,"

How many Blacks in Africa actually complain that the weather there is so hot that it makes it unlivable for them? I have never heard of an African immigrant who moved to Europe or North America because we have milder cooler weather compared to Africa. They are leaving because Africa is a 3rd World shithole, not because Africa lacks 4 distinct seasons.

My hometown in upstate NY occasionally hosts (via leftist churchy people) migrants waiting to get into Canada. I remember a couple African brothers (real brothers, not “yo, brotha” brothers) who were f’ing miserable in the cold weather, brand new churchy-people-provided Sorel boots and huge anoraks notwithstanding. Some like it hot.

When I was in Syracuse, I attended a church that hosted a congregation of Liberian refugees. Their services were great fun---lots of chanting and dancing. They hadn't entirely shed themselves of pagan practice, though, up to and including wife-swapping! The pastor was great, though. Highly educated and highly conservative in his theology. Nothing shuts up a lefty white preacher like a right-wing black preacher.

I felt bad for their kids; they mostly seemed keen on assimilating, but were assimilating to the norms of their gangbanging peers. Luckily, a few of them were uber-nerds and were assimilating to the norms of their nerdy peers.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want–generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.
Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West.

That doesn't make much sense economically, given the tiny percentage of recent migrants in Europe who work. To the extent they are consumers, it's because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants' social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

It's Davos consensus, that more people in the world is good a n d that more immigration is good.

- The reasoning behind this is: Growth is necessary. - That's your ponzi-scheme argument.Since the base of this argumentation is - at least - or better: Somewhat moral (Davos hates to be called immoral...) - the population-growth in Africa has to be looked upon as good. That's why Dave Pinsen's "simpler solution" isn't estimated by the Davos-crowd and by an - if ever declining - number of European heads of state (Hollande, who was undecided between the Davos ethics and DP's simpler solution lost the french publics's support in an until now unseen manner: The number of French people who still think he does a good job is in some weeks in the one-digit area.

Francois Fillon is Hollande's most likely successor - and he is against immigration - and against neo-keynesian public spending.

It can be both economic and demographic in intent. There are indeed many economic arguments for the 'elite' to use, none of which serve the native populations of Europe or America: (1) more warm bodies will consume and spend down social welfare, with greater GDP resulting (the farcical GDP calculations are another topic), (2) some migrants will even serve as low wage workers, and (3) removing Africans from key farmland and forest leaves land open to agribusiness and extractive industries.

But the demographic incentive is just as, if not greater to those in power. These motivations are far more notional and vague, as they're only alluded to entreaties like "Europe must undergo demographic change or it won't survive" (paraphrasing Barbara Lerner-Spectre), or the consistent "stale/pale/male" and "end white men" of the corporate media. One can look at who makes these statements -- and even though the statements made are the most anti-European imaginable, you'll quickly run into "anti-Semitic" accusations to even consider whether Jewish elite have white interests in mind. A case could be made of course that those currently holding global wealth would prefer an uneducated, ineducable mass to cement their power. This holds for elites regardless of ethnicity. But a case could also be made that so much of current policy is simply "never again" reaction, blaming all those of European ancestry whether or not they fought Nazism, and seeking a permanent solution -- this time for European peoples.

The third worlders don't produce anything or add any real value. In fact, they subtract long-term value by depressing first world fertility by means of their costly, lecherous dependency and disfunction. First worlders pay for those handouts and respond by decreasing their own fertility.

The economic growth we see is simply a proxy for increasing debt. Debt for those third worlders to consume and debt for our nation to pay for their inability to succeed. But that debt value inevitably collapses and penalizes first worlders harshly. Long-term misallocation of scarce resources leads to horrible dislocation and misery. Essentially, you are ensuring a totalitarian, distribution-focused central government. All for the temporary enjoyment of consumer goods by third world masses who mostly do not like you or your society. A proxy for the conclusion to this can be seen on the Pacific Island Cargo Cults that formed after the GIs left.

This type of growth also ensures inequality which leads to revolution and destruction, literally, of the wealthy.

I tend to agree. The big immigration pushers in western countries haven't been the economic leftists but the technocratic centrists. Centrists technocrats and neoconservatives like Bush, Blair, Clinton, Mulroney and Merkel have been the ones who have encouraged the big immigration surges.

In Australia the neoconservatives have been relatively tough on illegal immigration but they are still letting in huge numbers of Asians, as gleefully reported by the New York Times:

On paper this Asian immigration is good for the economy, but it does little to improve the quality of life for middle class natives. Surging house prices have pretty much cancelled out any benefits from increased wages.

I have made this point before, its all about creating consumers. Africans in huts in Africa don't by the everyday things that keep economies growing. They don't by things like toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste, etc. So even if they come over here and don't get a job and be successful, they will still be provided funds from the wests social programs to be consumers. To pay for they just raise taxes on us working stiffs. Either way the merchandise gets purchased keeps the stock market afloat.

I think wealth is kinda like an ocean current, it starts at the top and travels on down and as it does it picks up more money as travels back around and is much bigger when it get back to the top.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West.

That doesn’t make much sense economically, given the tiny percentage of recent migrants in Europe who work. To the extent they are consumers, it’s because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants’ social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

To the extent they are consumers, it’s because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants’ social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

If you will listen and pay attention to the Pols they actually say that money should be given to the indigent because they spend the money the fastest and therefore provide the greatest stimulus to the "economy". Money that trickles down to the working class through jobs programs is not as stimulative because they tend to save a little bit of it.

This is all encompassed in Modern Monetary Theory. MMT will work, but only as long as the government has massive power and can keep inflation in check once people are wise to the game. When the day comes that the people are wise to the game the government will realize that the unproductive masses are a liability, not an asset, and things will get interesting.

Not so sure about that. Immigration results in a massive boost in real estate, construction, health care, education, car sales, and weaponry that couldn't be duplicated. How many houses and apartments does a family need? Also, we might have larger families, or our women might stop having careers, and we all know where THAT leads...patriarchy, then Nazis..

The largest numbers are from Niger and its West African neighbors, including Mr. Bokoum’s home, Mali.
Scholars of migration count people like Mr. Bokoum among the millions who could be displaced around the world in coming decades as rising seas, widening deserts and erratic weather threaten traditional livelihoods.

How come people from Mali and Niger are somehow threatened by rising seas, since these countries are landlocked?

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

It’s Davos consensus, that more people in the world is good a n d that more immigration is good.

- The reasoning behind this is: Growth is necessary. – That’s your ponzi-scheme argument.
Since the base of this argumentation is – at least – or better: Somewhat moral (Davos hates to be called immoral…) – the population-growth in Africa has to be looked upon as good. That’s why Dave Pinsen’s “simpler solution” isn’t estimated by the Davos-crowd and by an – if ever declining – number of European heads of state (Hollande, who was undecided between the Davos ethics and DP’s simpler solution lost the french publics’s support in an until now unseen manner: The number of French people who still think he does a good job is in some weeks in the one-digit area.

Francois Fillon is Hollande’s most likely successor – and he is against immigration – and against neo-keynesian public spending.

The argument fails, however, because policy is invariably designed to produce growth through genocidal immigration rather than natural increase (which would actually produce greater growth due to the greater productivity of the natives of targeted countries). In other words, there's more to the reasoning than growth.

I am a little uncertain though how to classify this article; would you classify this article as Fake News or Lame News or even another/separate category of obfuscating/deflecting news altogether?:

We need some new conceptual categories to complement Fake News, such as Lame News: articles that have been intentionally hamstrung to avoid triggering Social Justice Warriors.

- http://www.unz.com/isteve/fake-news-boring-cousin-lame-news/

White Davos Men Urge Africans to Maintain Sky High Fertility

Opposition to birth control also comes from the Roman Catholic Church, the country’s largest, and from husbands who consider big families badges of masculine accomplishment, health workers say. [...]

WALLACE: Well, why should overpopulation work to diminish our freedoms?

HUXLEY: Well, in a number of ways. I mean, the…the experts in the field like Harrison Brown, for example, pointed out that in the underdeveloped countries actually the standard of living is at present falling. The people have less to eat and less goods per capita than they had fifty years ago; [...]

And unfortunately, as in all these underdeveloped countries the only highly organized political party is the Communist Party [Today, it is not Communists, but Islamists, financed by Petro-Islam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro-Islam] , [...]

WALLACE: Well then, ironically enough one of the greatest forces against communism in the world, the Catholic Church, according to your thesis would seem to be pushing us directly into the hands of the communists because they are against birth control. [...] Positive White pathological altruism. A brave White Davos Woman:Melinda Gates: ‘I’m a Catholic, but women need access to contraceptives’

Donald Trump met with Bill Gates a couple of days ago; let us hope Mr. Gates can convince President Trump to increase U.S. foreign aid birth control to Africa and the rest of the world's women who want it and need it: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/809097603010981888

This is definitely ``Bad News'':

Sorry Secularists, But Yes, The UN Can Be Led By A ‘Fervent Catholic’http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sorry.secularists.but.yes.the.un.can.be.led.by.a.fervent.catholic/98302.htm

“The Vatican may be the smallest state in the world but is very active at the United Nations,” Wood writes. “At the Human Rights Council, it is the only country I have seen that always has two representatives in the chamber listening to every syllable as though their lives depend on it, handing over the headphones to each other like relay runners do the baton.” [...]

Wood concludes: “When acting as Secretary General I would urge Guterres to embrace rather than obstruct the expansion and strengthening of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights and Gay Rights. The world will be watching and hoping fervently that he will not be unduly influenced by regressive religious forces.“

The U.S. should send a 5,000-strong security assistance brigade to the Democratic Republic of the Congo to help stabilize a country ravaged by more than a decade of war, a prominent U.S. military analyst recommends. [...] The impact of the Roman Catholic Church in the Democratic Republic of Congo is difficult to overestimate.[!!!!!!!] Schatzberg has called it the country’s “only truly national institution apart from the state.”

Here one of my comments on Eugene McCarthy and Catholic Vietnamese, etc. immigrants/refugees. Again, we see the Vatican-inspired “Invade (Protect) the (Catholic) World/Invite the (Catholic) World” scheme play out

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West.

That doesn't make much sense economically, given the tiny percentage of recent migrants in Europe who work. To the extent they are consumers, it's because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants' social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

To the extent they are consumers, it’s because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants’ social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

If you will listen and pay attention to the Pols they actually say that money should be given to the indigent because they spend the money the fastest and therefore provide the greatest stimulus to the “economy”. Money that trickles down to the working class through jobs programs is not as stimulative because they tend to save a little bit of it.

This is all encompassed in Modern Monetary Theory. MMT will work, but only as long as the government has massive power and can keep inflation in check once people are wise to the game. When the day comes that the people are wise to the game the government will realize that the unproductive masses are a liability, not an asset, and things will get interesting.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

It can be both economic and demographic in intent. There are indeed many economic arguments for the ‘elite’ to use, none of which serve the native populations of Europe or America: (1) more warm bodies will consume and spend down social welfare, with greater GDP resulting (the farcical GDP calculations are another topic), (2) some migrants will even serve as low wage workers, and (3) removing Africans from key farmland and forest leaves land open to agribusiness and extractive industries.

But the demographic incentive is just as, if not greater to those in power. These motivations are far more notional and vague, as they’re only alluded to entreaties like “Europe must undergo demographic change or it won’t survive” (paraphrasing Barbara Lerner-Spectre), or the consistent “stale/pale/male” and “end white men” of the corporate media. One can look at who makes these statements — and even though the statements made are the most anti-European imaginable, you’ll quickly run into “anti-Semitic” accusations to even consider whether Jewish elite have white interests in mind. A case could be made of course that those currently holding global wealth would prefer an uneducated, ineducable mass to cement their power. This holds for elites regardless of ethnicity. But a case could also be made that so much of current policy is simply “never again” reaction, blaming all those of European ancestry whether or not they fought Nazism, and seeking a permanent solution — this time for European peoples.

First world problem: do not upset the natives by telling them that their actions are harmful. They fuck too much and that causes pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases and other ills that do not respect quaint borders.

Third world problem: I am hungry

NGO solution: no birth control advice as that is cultural imperialism. Write a grant proposal to solicit free money to resettle afflicted people, add gratuitous photographs of children.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

They’re both real reasons. The left’s dirty little secret is that they’re run by and for plutocrats.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want–generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.
Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

Without all the millions of foreign workers flooding the labor market, American wages will rise.

You on the left have a lot more delusions than the alt-right (this ain’t exactly GOP central, here) does.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

That's an interesting perspective. It seems to me for a while we had a dichotomy of:
Democrat - government dictates to business (with lip service to the people)
Republican - business dominates (with lip service to the people, a different set of preferred issues though)
with nationalism and/or populism being down the list of priorities (R more of the former, D more the latter). I do kind of agree with your last sentence, it's just that I don't think we see that much in practice anymore (until Trump?).

IMHO This no longer applies after our last election cycle. The Democrats have swung to a much more corporatist POV (now they only act against business that does not fund them) and DemE (i.e. not the Berners) barely pays lip service to the people anymore (except for identity politics) and is much more warlike internationally. I find the GOPe (i.e. Never Trump) a hard to describe mix of old R and D-lite with Trump a hard to describe (and yet to be fully revealed) mix of old R/D with a substantial helping of both nationalism and populism.

Trump has obviously shaken things up, but it is by no means clear yet how things will settle out.

Perhaps you could expand on your paragraph that I quoted? I'm interested in a more detailed take.

P.S. I hope the above was coherent. I probably should not post while ill, but I was too intrigued by your point to pass.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

Whether it's right-wing or not nationalism dictating to business sounds like a good plan to me.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

That's not "extreme right" at all. It's just the old lefty J.K. Galbraith's theory of countervailing power: that strong democratic institutions are necessary to balance the power of big business

Globalist elites see demographic change as inevitable and worry about climate change, which they think can be altered by policy.

Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don't worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy.

Re Dave Pinson #9, demographic change drives climate change. But you don’t see the connection made often because the great and the good are quite comfortable with either one or the other.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

The third worlders don’t produce anything or add any real value. In fact, they subtract long-term value by depressing first world fertility by means of their costly, lecherous dependency and disfunction. First worlders pay for those handouts and respond by decreasing their own fertility.

The economic growth we see is simply a proxy for increasing debt. Debt for those third worlders to consume and debt for our nation to pay for their inability to succeed. But that debt value inevitably collapses and penalizes first worlders harshly. Long-term misallocation of scarce resources leads to horrible dislocation and misery. Essentially, you are ensuring a totalitarian, distribution-focused central government. All for the temporary enjoyment of consumer goods by third world masses who mostly do not like you or your society. A proxy for the conclusion to this can be seen on the Pacific Island Cargo Cults that formed after the GIs left.

This type of growth also ensures inequality which leads to revolution and destruction, literally, of the wealthy.

Agadez is a city of mud-brick compounds with high walls and blazing bright metal doors. For centuries, it was filled with traders and nomads. In recent decades, it was a tourist magnet, until ethnic rebellions and then jihadist violence drove people away.

Today, migration is the main industry. Drivers, smugglers, money changers, sex workers, police officers — everyone lives off the men on the move.

The smugglers had also started out as migrants, and most of them worked for a while in Libya. Now, they make money off other men’s journeys. None would hint at how much.

Mohamed Diallo, a Senegalese manager of the compound, blamed Western countries for spewing carbon into the atmosphere, and he was skeptical of their leaders’ promises to curb emissions.

You don’t imagine that as a “manager of the compound” – i.e., manager of a smuggler’s waystation – Mr. Diallo might be turning a little coin on the whole business?

“The big powers are polluting and creating problems for us,” he said. He was appalled that Africans trying to go to Europe were treated like criminals, when Europeans in Africa were treated like kings.

The estimated 60,000 white people tortured and murdered since the end of Apartheid in South Africa might disagree with this statement.

My hometown in upstate NY occasionally hosts (via leftist churchy people) migrants waiting to get into Canada. I remember a couple African brothers (real brothers, not "yo, brotha" brothers) who were f'ing miserable in the cold weather, brand new churchy-people-provided Sorel boots and huge anoraks notwithstanding. Some like it hot.

When I was in Syracuse, I attended a church that hosted a congregation of Liberian refugees. Their services were great fun—lots of chanting and dancing. They hadn’t entirely shed themselves of pagan practice, though, up to and including wife-swapping! The pastor was great, though. Highly educated and highly conservative in his theology. Nothing shuts up a lefty white preacher like a right-wing black preacher.

I felt bad for their kids; they mostly seemed keen on assimilating, but were assimilating to the norms of their gangbanging peers. Luckily, a few of them were uber-nerds and were assimilating to the norms of their nerdy peers.

Globalist elites see demographic change as inevitable and worry about climate change, which they think can be altered by policy.

Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don't worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy.

I think the dumbest thing is that the environmentalists think climate change can be affected by public policy, but not by the public policy of building lots and lots of new nuclear power plants. And yet nuclear is the only extant human technology that is compatible with first world levels of energy consumption that doesn’t emit CO2. It’s almost as if for most of the climate people the penitence and self flagellation (by conserving energy and importing third world refugees) is more important than rapidly reducing CO2 emissions.

Also your observation is astute. It takes a strange worldview to think that reorganizing energy production away from the technologies in use in the entire developed world is an easier problem to solve than preventing third world migrants from moving to the developed world. Also isn’t blocking that migration obligatory under the climate change mindset? We should have as few people living a first world lifestyle as possible until it can be lived without CO2 emissions.

The official title used is His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa.[77] He is Commander in Chief of The Armed Forces and Chief Custodian of the Sacred Constitution of the Gambia.[78]

On 16 June 2015, a statement from the State House stated that President Jammeh should be addressed as "His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh Babili Mansa".[79] The title Babili Mansa, which the President decided to drop in December 2014, is a phrase in the Mandinka language that could be translated as either "Chief Bridge Builder" or "Conqueror of Rivers".[80][81] Two months before, he had already removed the title "Nasirul Deen", which had been conferred to him by the Gambia Supreme Islamic Council.[82]

Awards and honours[edit]

... He has received awards through the unrecognised higher education accreditation organisation the International Parliament for Safety and Peace, including a peace award,[87] the honorary title of Kentucky colonel[88] and the tongue-in-cheek award of Nebraska Admiral.[89][90][91][92] Jennifer Rae Hein, a spokeswoman for the Governor of Nebraska, acknowledged that Jammeh was granted an admiralship in the Nebraska Navy,[93] but later stated "We regret that this individual has attempted to embellish a certificate for a Nebraska admiralship, claiming that it was a high honor bestowed upon him by the governor, when to the best of our knowledge, this person has no relationship with or ties to Nebraska."[94]

“The title Babili Mansa, which the President decided to drop in December 2014, is a phrase in the Mandinka language that could be translated as either “Chief Bridge Builder” or “Conqueror of Rivers”.”

Funny, that’s the original meaning of the Roman “Pontifex maximus”, from the old religious College of Pontiffs, later bestowed upon Roman Emperors and lately to Roman Catholic Popes.

Whenever I read thins like “They do it because the rains have become so fickle, the days measurably hotter…” I do a little Googling to see if perhaps the temperature has indeed spiked a few degrees recently, only to find:

Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures warmed roughly 1.53 degrees Fahrenheit (0.85 degrees Celsius) from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 3 of the 2013 summary report).

Cities are hotter than farmland; farmland is hotter than forest. So I don't think there's any question that more human activity = higher temperatures. But I don't think it's because of coal-fired plants in China or commuters in the US.

Bizarrely, this feeds into the African/American Negro belief that whites have magical powers that they use to keep blacks poor--they actually manipulate the weather to the disadvantage of Africans/Negroes.

It is not only Africans who believe this, it is actually in the current state of affairs one of the whitest thing you can do to believe in these things.

It's Davos consensus, that more people in the world is good a n d that more immigration is good.

- The reasoning behind this is: Growth is necessary. - That's your ponzi-scheme argument.Since the base of this argumentation is - at least - or better: Somewhat moral (Davos hates to be called immoral...) - the population-growth in Africa has to be looked upon as good. That's why Dave Pinsen's "simpler solution" isn't estimated by the Davos-crowd and by an - if ever declining - number of European heads of state (Hollande, who was undecided between the Davos ethics and DP's simpler solution lost the french publics's support in an until now unseen manner: The number of French people who still think he does a good job is in some weeks in the one-digit area.

Francois Fillon is Hollande's most likely successor - and he is against immigration - and against neo-keynesian public spending.

It’s Davos consensus, that more people in the world is good a n d that more immigration is good.

The argument fails, however, because policy is invariably designed to produce growth through genocidal immigration rather than natural increase (which would actually produce greater growth due to the greater productivity of the natives of targeted countries). In other words, there’s more to the reasoning than growth.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

No its mainly white women who want more black men in their countries. Everybody knows that this immigration economically makes no sense, for nobody except for the migrants themselves of course

"Our women want BBC and not just on television. We must open the floodgates!"

Sorry no. "What women want" is Freudian dithering, not a policy concern. And women generally speaking don't want sub-literate migrants fathering their children. Especially those from the most AIDS-infected region of the world.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West.

That doesn't make much sense economically, given the tiny percentage of recent migrants in Europe who work. To the extent they are consumers, it's because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants' social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

Not so sure about that. Immigration results in a massive boost in real estate, construction, health care, education, car sales, and weaponry that couldn’t be duplicated. How many houses and apartments does a family need? Also, we might have larger families, or our women might stop having careers, and we all know where THAT leads…patriarchy, then Nazis..

They don’t mention the benefits of fossil fuels. Granted, the Sahel isn’t much of an industrial powerhouse, and the per capita carbon footprint may be small, but I’m sure the carrying capacity of the land and the standard of living of the inhabitants have both been increased by, say, the automobile.

On balance, has carbon been a net positive or negative for the developing world? Surely a positive, I would think. Think of the energy that powers urbanization, mining, shipping, fertilizer production, food processing, etc.

So we’re back to the demographic issue. If there are too many people for these countries to accommodate, it’s not because of fossil fuels but in spite of them.

“He was working as sales manager at a gas company when he decided to travel to London to study and save up funds to start his own company. He is proud of an experience that included working as a security guard in an Argos store in Holloway Road, north London. “Life is a process, and the UK helped helped me to become the person I am today. Working 15 hours a day builds a man,” Barrow told Le Monde during the election campaign.”

For anybody who understands the most elementary mathematics, that’s all one needs to know as to the cause of food shortages. Only the timing is dependent on other factors. Consult Malthus for the details.

I’ve said more of substance in these few sentences than in that entire article.

When I was in my twenties I read books on overpopulation – books by Borgstrom and Erlich. In their apocalyptic visions all nations and all races suffered from overpopulation. I can’t remember if any of those doom-sayers ever predicted a world where most the world got its population under control and one region – Africa had a population explosion.

So the pattern we see today was not recognized by the pessimistic futurists. That means I am free to make any wild ass prognostication I want.

The obvious remedy that that springs to mind is a return of genocide as a public policy. Europe and the Americas will first build walls like the one Donald Trump keeps promising. But soon the nations which most of bear the burden of the migrating Africans may go to the source of the excess people.

In previous centuries there were two routes for black slaves out of Africa. There was the passage by ship across the Atlantic, and there was the path across the Sahara. The path to the Islamic states of the Middle East was we are told the larger path. More blacks died crossing the Sahara than died in the slave ships. One reason this was true was that the Muslim slave traders routinely castrated the men and boys.

Today there are not many blacks in the Middle East in spite of their long history of importing black slaves in great numbers. Middle Eastern Muslims don’t seem to want Sub-Saharan blacks in their nations. And they have had little compunction about sterilizing them or simply murdering them.

The path out of Africa to the Asian supercontinent on foot runs through the Middle East. The Muslim nations then act as a bottle stopper holding the blacks in. But it may also mean that the Muslim nations will relieve the pressure by actively reducing the number of blacks in Africa.

There are several areas that would be interested in reducing the population of blacks in Africa. First there is China. China is probably too distant from Africa to worry about an direct invasion of blacks. China is active in black Africa and may have imperial ambitions but probably not soon. China has its own population problems. I expect Europe to ‘lock down’ with physical and legal walls. The Americas have an ocean between us. Many liberals and African-Americans in the US will probably argue for mass immigration from Africa to here but I expect that that appeal will be rejected.

That leaves the Islamic Middle East. Africans can walk to and through the Middle East – they did it 50,000 years ago. So they are most at risk from too many African blacks. So in the near future I’m sort of predicting that the ISIS radicals will pivot away from conquering Europe and the US and develop some new interpretation of the Koran that requires them to kill large numbers of Africans.

This is my theory of how the world will react to the population explosion in Africa. It took me about twenty minutes to devise and develop. I think it is as plausible as any vision that Erlich ever had.

Africans by the "B" billions as biomass. That's what's going to happen.

But long before a billion skulls are piled in the Middle East, one plague or another will plant them right where they were born. The really interesting change will be the curtailment of international air travel once contagion begins to spread.

Africans won't be trying to cross the Atlantic in papyrus rafts.

In the interest of political correctness, the same plagues will likely sweep America's large cities, solving for a century or two the problem of Democrat Voters.

An increasing number of African blacks are Muslim. ISIS (and The Powers That Be here, too) prefer to send Africans to Europe - ISIS because weight of numbers will increase Islam's power and TPTB as a way of breaking European societies.

Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population. Fun fact: part of the Persian antipathy toward Arabs is a knowledge/shunning of this African admixture. You'll hear how Persians are "actually Aryan" and many choice terms for Arabs (like "sand n***").

If post 1945 past and present are any sort of guide or yardstick for predicting future policies, then it is exceedingly likely that the European nations, the western ones at any rate, will implement 'liberal' Economist style immigration 'policies' and will positively invite in as many black Africans as possible.

When I was in my twenties I read books on overpopulation - books by Borgstrom and Erlich. In their apocalyptic visions all nations and all races suffered from overpopulation. I can't remember if any of those doom-sayers ever predicted a world where most the world got its population under control and one region - Africa had a population explosion.

So the pattern we see today was not recognized by the pessimistic futurists. That means I am free to make any wild ass prognostication I want.

The obvious remedy that that springs to mind is a return of genocide as a public policy. Europe and the Americas will first build walls like the one Donald Trump keeps promising. But soon the nations which most of bear the burden of the migrating Africans may go to the source of the excess people.

In previous centuries there were two routes for black slaves out of Africa. There was the passage by ship across the Atlantic, and there was the path across the Sahara. The path to the Islamic states of the Middle East was we are told the larger path. More blacks died crossing the Sahara than died in the slave ships. One reason this was true was that the Muslim slave traders routinely castrated the men and boys.

Today there are not many blacks in the Middle East in spite of their long history of importing black slaves in great numbers. Middle Eastern Muslims don't seem to want Sub-Saharan blacks in their nations. And they have had little compunction about sterilizing them or simply murdering them.

The path out of Africa to the Asian supercontinent on foot runs through the Middle East. The Muslim nations then act as a bottle stopper holding the blacks in. But it may also mean that the Muslim nations will relieve the pressure by actively reducing the number of blacks in Africa.

There are several areas that would be interested in reducing the population of blacks in Africa. First there is China. China is probably too distant from Africa to worry about an direct invasion of blacks. China is active in black Africa and may have imperial ambitions but probably not soon. China has its own population problems. I expect Europe to 'lock down' with physical and legal walls. The Americas have an ocean between us. Many liberals and African-Americans in the US will probably argue for mass immigration from Africa to here but I expect that that appeal will be rejected.

That leaves the Islamic Middle East. Africans can walk to and through the Middle East - they did it 50,000 years ago. So they are most at risk from too many African blacks. So in the near future I'm sort of predicting that the ISIS radicals will pivot away from conquering Europe and the US and develop some new interpretation of the Koran that requires them to kill large numbers of Africans.

This is my theory of how the world will react to the population explosion in Africa. It took me about twenty minutes to devise and develop. I think it is as plausible as any vision that Erlich ever had.

Africans by the “B” billions as biomass. That’s what’s going to happen.

But long before a billion skulls are piled in the Middle East, one plague or another will plant them right where they were born. The really interesting change will be the curtailment of international air travel once contagion begins to spread.

Africans won’t be trying to cross the Atlantic in papyrus rafts.

In the interest of political correctness, the same plagues will likely sweep America’s large cities, solving for a century or two the problem of Democrat Voters.

"He was working as sales manager at a gas company when he decided to travel to London to study and save up funds to start his own company. He is proud of an experience that included working as a security guard in an Argos store in Holloway Road, north London. “Life is a process, and the UK helped helped me to become the person I am today. Working 15 hours a day builds a man,” Barrow told Le Monde during the election campaign."

It's Davos consensus, that more people in the world is good a n d that more immigration is good.

- The reasoning behind this is: Growth is necessary. - That's your ponzi-scheme argument.Since the base of this argumentation is - at least - or better: Somewhat moral (Davos hates to be called immoral...) - the population-growth in Africa has to be looked upon as good. That's why Dave Pinsen's "simpler solution" isn't estimated by the Davos-crowd and by an - if ever declining - number of European heads of state (Hollande, who was undecided between the Davos ethics and DP's simpler solution lost the french publics's support in an until now unseen manner: The number of French people who still think he does a good job is in some weeks in the one-digit area.

Francois Fillon is Hollande's most likely successor - and he is against immigration - and against neo-keynesian public spending.

Great analysis, Mr. Sailer!

I am a little uncertain though how to classify this article; would you classify this article as Fake News or Lame News or even another/separate category of obfuscating/deflecting news altogether?:

We need some new conceptual categories to complement Fake News, such as Lame News: articles that have been intentionally hamstrung to avoid triggering Social Justice Warriors.

Opposition to birth control also comes from the Roman Catholic Church, the country’s largest, and from husbands who consider big families badges of masculine accomplishment, health workers say. [...]

WALLACE: Well, why should overpopulation work to diminish our freedoms?

HUXLEY: Well, in a number of ways. I mean, the…the experts in the field like Harrison Brown, for example, pointed out that in the underdeveloped countries actually the standard of living is at present falling. The people have less to eat and less goods per capita than they had fifty years ago; [...]

“The Vatican may be the smallest state in the world but is very active at the United Nations,” Wood writes. “At the Human Rights Council, it is the only country I have seen that always has two representatives in the chamber listening to every syllable as though their lives depend on it, handing over the headphones to each other like relay runners do the baton.” [...]

Wood concludes: “When acting as Secretary General I would urge Guterres to embrace rather than obstruct the expansion and strengthening of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights and Gay Rights. The world will be watching and hoping fervently that he will not be unduly influenced by regressive religious forces.“

The U.S. should send a 5,000-strong security assistance brigade to the Democratic Republic of the Congo to help stabilize a country ravaged by more than a decade of war, a prominent U.S. military analyst recommends. [...] The impact of the Roman Catholic Church in the Democratic Republic of Congo is difficult to overestimate.[!!!!!!!] Schatzberg has called it the country’s “only truly national institution apart from the state.”

Here one of my comments on Eugene McCarthy and Catholic Vietnamese, etc. immigrants/refugees. Again, we see the Vatican-inspired “Invade (Protect) the (Catholic) World/Invite the (Catholic) World” scheme play out

- could she understand, that this was a big step for catholic theology, to abandon the ages-old Moses 9, 7 imperative - Be fruitful and multiply!" - -?

And it's not only Catholic theology - there's lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Plus: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is improving the reproductive rates whereever they are active in medical help for Africa, because by concentrating on financing medical help, they - want it or not - improve birthrates.

I just can't see, that they get this - even though Steve Sailer pointed out lately, that Bill Gates was able to think things over, if something that he organizes doesn't have the right outcome.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

I tend to agree. The big immigration pushers in western countries haven’t been the economic leftists but the technocratic centrists. Centrists technocrats and neoconservatives like Bush, Blair, Clinton, Mulroney and Merkel have been the ones who have encouraged the big immigration surges.

In Australia the neoconservatives have been relatively tough on illegal immigration but they are still letting in huge numbers of Asians, as gleefully reported by the New York Times:

On paper this Asian immigration is good for the economy, but it does little to improve the quality of life for middle class natives. Surging house prices have pretty much cancelled out any benefits from increased wages.

When I was in my twenties I read books on overpopulation - books by Borgstrom and Erlich. In their apocalyptic visions all nations and all races suffered from overpopulation. I can't remember if any of those doom-sayers ever predicted a world where most the world got its population under control and one region - Africa had a population explosion.

So the pattern we see today was not recognized by the pessimistic futurists. That means I am free to make any wild ass prognostication I want.

The obvious remedy that that springs to mind is a return of genocide as a public policy. Europe and the Americas will first build walls like the one Donald Trump keeps promising. But soon the nations which most of bear the burden of the migrating Africans may go to the source of the excess people.

In previous centuries there were two routes for black slaves out of Africa. There was the passage by ship across the Atlantic, and there was the path across the Sahara. The path to the Islamic states of the Middle East was we are told the larger path. More blacks died crossing the Sahara than died in the slave ships. One reason this was true was that the Muslim slave traders routinely castrated the men and boys.

Today there are not many blacks in the Middle East in spite of their long history of importing black slaves in great numbers. Middle Eastern Muslims don't seem to want Sub-Saharan blacks in their nations. And they have had little compunction about sterilizing them or simply murdering them.

The path out of Africa to the Asian supercontinent on foot runs through the Middle East. The Muslim nations then act as a bottle stopper holding the blacks in. But it may also mean that the Muslim nations will relieve the pressure by actively reducing the number of blacks in Africa.

There are several areas that would be interested in reducing the population of blacks in Africa. First there is China. China is probably too distant from Africa to worry about an direct invasion of blacks. China is active in black Africa and may have imperial ambitions but probably not soon. China has its own population problems. I expect Europe to 'lock down' with physical and legal walls. The Americas have an ocean between us. Many liberals and African-Americans in the US will probably argue for mass immigration from Africa to here but I expect that that appeal will be rejected.

That leaves the Islamic Middle East. Africans can walk to and through the Middle East - they did it 50,000 years ago. So they are most at risk from too many African blacks. So in the near future I'm sort of predicting that the ISIS radicals will pivot away from conquering Europe and the US and develop some new interpretation of the Koran that requires them to kill large numbers of Africans.

This is my theory of how the world will react to the population explosion in Africa. It took me about twenty minutes to devise and develop. I think it is as plausible as any vision that Erlich ever had.

An increasing number of African blacks are Muslim. ISIS (and The Powers That Be here, too) prefer to send Africans to Europe – ISIS because weight of numbers will increase Islam’s power and TPTB as a way of breaking European societies.

There they were forced to drink a foul-smelling concoction that made them hallucinate, gave them severe stomach pains, induced some to try digging a hole in a tiled floor, made others try climbing up a wall and in some cases killed them

My God, it sounds like they’re feeding people jenkem, i.e. fermented shit. Only in Africa… and let’s hope it stays there.

When I was in my twenties I read books on overpopulation - books by Borgstrom and Erlich. In their apocalyptic visions all nations and all races suffered from overpopulation. I can't remember if any of those doom-sayers ever predicted a world where most the world got its population under control and one region - Africa had a population explosion.

So the pattern we see today was not recognized by the pessimistic futurists. That means I am free to make any wild ass prognostication I want.

The obvious remedy that that springs to mind is a return of genocide as a public policy. Europe and the Americas will first build walls like the one Donald Trump keeps promising. But soon the nations which most of bear the burden of the migrating Africans may go to the source of the excess people.

In previous centuries there were two routes for black slaves out of Africa. There was the passage by ship across the Atlantic, and there was the path across the Sahara. The path to the Islamic states of the Middle East was we are told the larger path. More blacks died crossing the Sahara than died in the slave ships. One reason this was true was that the Muslim slave traders routinely castrated the men and boys.

Today there are not many blacks in the Middle East in spite of their long history of importing black slaves in great numbers. Middle Eastern Muslims don't seem to want Sub-Saharan blacks in their nations. And they have had little compunction about sterilizing them or simply murdering them.

The path out of Africa to the Asian supercontinent on foot runs through the Middle East. The Muslim nations then act as a bottle stopper holding the blacks in. But it may also mean that the Muslim nations will relieve the pressure by actively reducing the number of blacks in Africa.

There are several areas that would be interested in reducing the population of blacks in Africa. First there is China. China is probably too distant from Africa to worry about an direct invasion of blacks. China is active in black Africa and may have imperial ambitions but probably not soon. China has its own population problems. I expect Europe to 'lock down' with physical and legal walls. The Americas have an ocean between us. Many liberals and African-Americans in the US will probably argue for mass immigration from Africa to here but I expect that that appeal will be rejected.

That leaves the Islamic Middle East. Africans can walk to and through the Middle East - they did it 50,000 years ago. So they are most at risk from too many African blacks. So in the near future I'm sort of predicting that the ISIS radicals will pivot away from conquering Europe and the US and develop some new interpretation of the Koran that requires them to kill large numbers of Africans.

This is my theory of how the world will react to the population explosion in Africa. It took me about twenty minutes to devise and develop. I think it is as plausible as any vision that Erlich ever had.

Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population. Fun fact: part of the Persian antipathy toward Arabs is a knowledge/shunning of this African admixture. You’ll hear how Persians are “actually Aryan” and many choice terms for Arabs (like “sand n***”).

Reich’s team analyzed more than half a million DNA markers across the entire genomes of people from seven diverse Jewish populations — including Ashkenazim from northern Europe; Sephardim from Italy, Turkey and Greece, and Mizrahim from Syria, Iraq and Iran. They then compared the genetic data with DNA from 15 sub-Saharan African populations.

Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans, and that the exchange of genes between Jews and sub-Saharan Africans occurred approximately 72 generations, or about 2,000 years, ago.

Priya Moorjani, a doctoral student in Reich’s lab who led the research, was surprised that the degree of African DNA was so consistent across the various Jewish populations. She had expected, for example, that North African and Middle Eastern Jews would have a greater degree of genetic mingling than Europeans, based on their geographic proximities.

So the findings, Moorjani said, may point to a shared ancestry among the various Jewish groups. “It’s definitely suggestive that most Jewish populations have a common ancestral population,” she said.

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran's population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

"Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population."

Surprisingly, Saudis actually have more paternal than maternal Sub-Saharan ancestry, based on the studies I've seen.

No amount of foreign aid will be able to blunt the coming catastrophe in Africa – might as well pull the plug now and let them start figuring out what to do with the spigot turned off. It’s the only chance they have.

No its mainly white women who want more black men in their countries. Everybody knows that this immigration economically makes no sense, for nobody except for the migrants themselves of course

“Our women want BBC and not just on television. We must open the floodgates!”

Sorry no. “What women want” is Freudian dithering, not a policy concern. And women generally speaking don’t want sub-literate migrants fathering their children. Especially those from the most AIDS-infected region of the world.

East Asian men (punching bag of PUAs) outperform Monkey men when it comes to White women. The fixation on Monkey men I suspect links to watching too much porn and other forms of Negrophilia that apparently keeps popping among the Alt Right.

Yes, NYT will strain every muscle to blame the ills of Africa on whites in Europe and the US.

With the problems in the middle east, the NYT and similar liberals blame the wars and conflict on whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. How are all these battles between rival Islamic extremists in MENA the fault of Christians in Europe and the US and Australia? That doesn’t make sense.

With all the problems of sub-saharan Africa and Haiti, it makes even less sense to blame everything on the whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. In fact, it’s obviously ridiculous. NYT is doing it anyway. 1.5 degrees of warming is not causing all the problems of Sub-Saharan Africa.

The other lie, is that whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia benefit from explosive ethnic diversity so it is imperative to engage in hyper immigration to deliver these benefits to needy whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia.

The biggest lie is on birth rates. Whites used to have tons of children, now they have very few. This isn’t advanced technology. People know how to make babies. But these are obviously controlled by culture and social norms. The lie is that these birth rates can’t be changed. Of course they can. If NYT and WaPo and the president used the Bully Pulpit to drill different cultural norms into peoples heads, it is actually easy to do.

A recent Sailer article quoted a NYT story about a man from Africa with 19 children who had to immigrate to Europe to enroll in social assistance because he had no means to care for his 19 children. The article was sympathetic to the man and horrified that Europeans would support immigration restrictions. The comment section, even the NYT commenters, were horrified. Meanwhile, Europeans themselves have their own struggles. It’s actually hard to develop and maintain a successful career that supports a comfortable western lifestyle. Tons of westerners are drowning in debt or struggling with working class jobs. Adding a family is even harder. And kids are very expensive in western societies. It baffles me that the NYT will argue that this African man with nineteen kids and zero job skills, it’s the imperative of working class families in Germany to shoulder the burden, provide money, schooling, housing, education, etc.

The New York Times problems may be lurching toward a solution. They have struggled with their business model, as evidenced by the space reductions (accompanied by layoffs) discussed in the linked article. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of trolls.

Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population. Fun fact: part of the Persian antipathy toward Arabs is a knowledge/shunning of this African admixture. You'll hear how Persians are "actually Aryan" and many choice terms for Arabs (like "sand n***").

Reich’s team analyzed more than half a million DNA markers across the entire genomes of people from seven diverse Jewish populations — including Ashkenazim from northern Europe; Sephardim from Italy, Turkey and Greece, and Mizrahim from Syria, Iraq and Iran. They then compared the genetic data with DNA from 15 sub-Saharan African populations.

Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans, and that the exchange of genes between Jews and sub-Saharan Africans occurred approximately 72 generations, or about 2,000 years, ago.

Priya Moorjani, a doctoral student in Reich’s lab who led the research, was surprised that the degree of African DNA was so consistent across the various Jewish populations. She had expected, for example, that North African and Middle Eastern Jews would have a greater degree of genetic mingling than Europeans, based on their geographic proximities.

So the findings, Moorjani said, may point to a shared ancestry among the various Jewish groups. “It’s definitely suggestive that most Jewish populations have a common ancestral population,” she said.

"Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans,"

This is bullshit. If this were true than why has no Sub Saharan African admixture popped up in the DNA results of any Hollywood Jewish celebrities who publicly took a DNA test and revealed the results on television. No Negro blood popped up in the DNA ancestry results of Larry David, Gwyneth Paltrow, Robert Downey Jr., Dustin Hoffman, etc.

"White Hispanics" are a lot more likely to have Sub Saharan African admixture than Jews.

Sorry to burst your bias anti-Jewish bubble, but Jews would not be considered Black by Jim Crow one drop rule standards.

I am a little uncertain though how to classify this article; would you classify this article as Fake News or Lame News or even another/separate category of obfuscating/deflecting news altogether?:

We need some new conceptual categories to complement Fake News, such as Lame News: articles that have been intentionally hamstrung to avoid triggering Social Justice Warriors.

- http://www.unz.com/isteve/fake-news-boring-cousin-lame-news/

White Davos Men Urge Africans to Maintain Sky High Fertility

Opposition to birth control also comes from the Roman Catholic Church, the country’s largest, and from husbands who consider big families badges of masculine accomplishment, health workers say. [...]

WALLACE: Well, why should overpopulation work to diminish our freedoms?

HUXLEY: Well, in a number of ways. I mean, the…the experts in the field like Harrison Brown, for example, pointed out that in the underdeveloped countries actually the standard of living is at present falling. The people have less to eat and less goods per capita than they had fifty years ago; [...]

And unfortunately, as in all these underdeveloped countries the only highly organized political party is the Communist Party [Today, it is not Communists, but Islamists, financed by Petro-Islam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro-Islam] , [...]

WALLACE: Well then, ironically enough one of the greatest forces against communism in the world, the Catholic Church, according to your thesis would seem to be pushing us directly into the hands of the communists because they are against birth control. [...] Positive White pathological altruism. A brave White Davos Woman:Melinda Gates: ‘I’m a Catholic, but women need access to contraceptives’

Donald Trump met with Bill Gates a couple of days ago; let us hope Mr. Gates can convince President Trump to increase U.S. foreign aid birth control to Africa and the rest of the world's women who want it and need it: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/809097603010981888

This is definitely ``Bad News'':

Sorry Secularists, But Yes, The UN Can Be Led By A ‘Fervent Catholic’http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sorry.secularists.but.yes.the.un.can.be.led.by.a.fervent.catholic/98302.htm

“The Vatican may be the smallest state in the world but is very active at the United Nations,” Wood writes. “At the Human Rights Council, it is the only country I have seen that always has two representatives in the chamber listening to every syllable as though their lives depend on it, handing over the headphones to each other like relay runners do the baton.” [...]

Wood concludes: “When acting as Secretary General I would urge Guterres to embrace rather than obstruct the expansion and strengthening of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights and Gay Rights. The world will be watching and hoping fervently that he will not be unduly influenced by regressive religious forces.“

The U.S. should send a 5,000-strong security assistance brigade to the Democratic Republic of the Congo to help stabilize a country ravaged by more than a decade of war, a prominent U.S. military analyst recommends. [...] The impact of the Roman Catholic Church in the Democratic Republic of Congo is difficult to overestimate.[!!!!!!!] Schatzberg has called it the country’s “only truly national institution apart from the state.”

Here one of my comments on Eugene McCarthy and Catholic Vietnamese, etc. immigrants/refugees. Again, we see the Vatican-inspired “Invade (Protect) the (Catholic) World/Invite the (Catholic) World” scheme play out

- could she understand, that this was a big step for catholic theology, to abandon the ages-old Moses 9, 7 imperative – Be fruitful and multiply!” – -?

And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.
And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Plus: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is improving the reproductive rates whereever they are active in medical help for Africa, because by concentrating on financing medical help, they – want it or not – improve birthrates.

I just can’t see, that they get this – even though Steve Sailer pointed out lately, that Bill Gates was able to think things over, if something that he organizes doesn’t have the right outcome.

"And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well. And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this."

And yet, Catholic countries from Italy to Brazil (the latter has plenty of Evangelicals, too) have managed to tame their population growth substantially (in the case of Italy, perhaps disastrously so). The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old, but they're surrounded by Muslims, some of them quite hostile, so if the Christians follow the Italian model while the Muslims bide their time, it likely won't end well for them.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you'll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to US national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development.

And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.
And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

The Vatican’s Role in the World Population Crisis: The Untold Story

On November 26, 1975, the 227-page report and its recommendations were endorsed by President Ford. However, none of them were ever implemented. The Vatican moved swiftly to intervene, and all efforts were very quietly subverted.

On November 20, 1975, six days before Ford endorsed the recommendations, the U.S. Catholic bishops adopted a plan to build a political machine with the stated goal of passing a human rights amendment to the Constitution. This plan, which is represented by a printed document, describes the creation of the new right movement, including the Moral Majority. Within a period of only four years, almost the entire new right movement had been created. More recently, the bishops were the moving force behind the creation of the Christian Coalition to replace the Moral Majority, which had fallen into public disrepute.

Issued more than a quarter century after the first plan was released in 1975, the 2001 "Pastoral Plan for Pro-Life Activities: A Campaign in Support of Life" relies heavily on statements from Pope John Paul II's 1995 encyclical, The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae), and the 1998 statement by the bishops, Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics.

- http://www.nrlc.org/archive/news/2001/NRL12/ernie.html

I have a theory - admittedly it is a bit 'kooky' - that Ted Cruz and his father are part of this Pastoral Plan, that took over and infiltrated Protestant denominations as part of a Vatican-led and -directed pro-life Christian coalition:

[...]The Plan has taken the protest out of the Protestant movement. Until the Pastoral Plan, Protestant denominations had no reservations about protesting or criticizing the Catholic Church. The plan specifically targeted the Protestant Churches to silence them. The bishops succeeded.[...]

I personally consider Ted Cruz and his father to be crypto-Catholics and opportunist/fake Evangelicals. Maybe they are even Vatican agents?:

Cruz left the Roman Catholic Church in 1975 [ This could just be a coincidence, but the Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities was released the same year.] and became an Evangelical Christian after attending a Bible study with a colleague and having a born again experience. Explaining his leaving the Catholic church, Cruz stated in an interview with National Review, “The people at the Bible study had a peace that I could not understand, this peace in the midst of trouble. I knew I needed to find that peace by finding Jesus Christ.” Following his conversion, his son and wife also became born-again Christians. [...] About his political involvements in the 1980s, Cruz reflected, “I was on the state board of the Religious Roundtable, a Christian and Jewish religious organization that worked to elect Ronald Reagan.” At the time, he told his son, “God has destined you for greatness.”[17][30]

And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.
And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Mr. Kief,

have you heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200 before?

The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to US national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development.

Canadian Madeline Weld has taken a serious look at the International Feminist Movement. Her findings are most revealing: "[T]he Vatican, and various allies,...categorize as racism any arguments for limiting population growth and any reasonable objections to unlimited immigration....[F]ar too many people are intimidated into silence by this form of intellectual terrorism.

Reich’s team analyzed more than half a million DNA markers across the entire genomes of people from seven diverse Jewish populations — including Ashkenazim from northern Europe; Sephardim from Italy, Turkey and Greece, and Mizrahim from Syria, Iraq and Iran. They then compared the genetic data with DNA from 15 sub-Saharan African populations.

Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans, and that the exchange of genes between Jews and sub-Saharan Africans occurred approximately 72 generations, or about 2,000 years, ago.

Priya Moorjani, a doctoral student in Reich’s lab who led the research, was surprised that the degree of African DNA was so consistent across the various Jewish populations. She had expected, for example, that North African and Middle Eastern Jews would have a greater degree of genetic mingling than Europeans, based on their geographic proximities.

So the findings, Moorjani said, may point to a shared ancestry among the various Jewish groups. “It’s definitely suggestive that most Jewish populations have a common ancestral population,” she said.

“Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans,”

This is bullshit. If this were true than why has no Sub Saharan African admixture popped up in the DNA results of any Hollywood Jewish celebrities who publicly took a DNA test and revealed the results on television. No Negro blood popped up in the DNA ancestry results of Larry David, Gwyneth Paltrow, Robert Downey Jr., Dustin Hoffman, etc.

“White Hispanics” are a lot more likely to have Sub Saharan African admixture than Jews.

Sorry to burst your bias anti-Jewish bubble, but Jews would not be considered Black by Jim Crow one drop rule standards.

Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population. Fun fact: part of the Persian antipathy toward Arabs is a knowledge/shunning of this African admixture. You'll hear how Persians are "actually Aryan" and many choice terms for Arabs (like "sand n***").

“You’ll hear how Persians are “actually Aryan”

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran’s population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

Iranians and Indians, for that matter, have the rightful and true claim on the word 'Aryan' - it's their word and their history. 'Aryan' , originally, before 19th century European academics got hold of the word, was the self designation of the Steppic people of central Asia who invaded India and Iran and who imposed their language and culture. Thus the word has been used continuously as a self designation by upper caste Indians and Iranians ever since. So to speak of 'blond Aryans' is as nonsensical as to speak of a 'blond language'.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

“Back then, like most villagers, his father had a cow and plenty of sheep. … Most of the trees are gone “
They don’t really understand cause and effect, do they? Unless strictly controlled by fencing etc., you can’t have flocks of ovicaprids and trees/shrubs regenerating.
One or the other, like Open Borders and the Welfare State. Desertification machines, worse than deer.
China of course emits no carbon. So no Africans are piling in there.

Yes, NYT will strain every muscle to blame the ills of Africa on whites in Europe and the US.

With the problems in the middle east, the NYT and similar liberals blame the wars and conflict on whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. How are all these battles between rival Islamic extremists in MENA the fault of Christians in Europe and the US and Australia? That doesn't make sense.

With all the problems of sub-saharan Africa and Haiti, it makes even less sense to blame everything on the whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. In fact, it's obviously ridiculous. NYT is doing it anyway. 1.5 degrees of warming is not causing all the problems of Sub-Saharan Africa.

The other lie, is that whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia benefit from explosive ethnic diversity so it is imperative to engage in hyper immigration to deliver these benefits to needy whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia.

The biggest lie is on birth rates. Whites used to have tons of children, now they have very few. This isn't advanced technology. People know how to make babies. But these are obviously controlled by culture and social norms. The lie is that these birth rates can't be changed. Of course they can. If NYT and WaPo and the president used the Bully Pulpit to drill different cultural norms into peoples heads, it is actually easy to do.

A recent Sailer article quoted a NYT story about a man from Africa with 19 children who had to immigrate to Europe to enroll in social assistance because he had no means to care for his 19 children. The article was sympathetic to the man and horrified that Europeans would support immigration restrictions. The comment section, even the NYT commenters, were horrified. Meanwhile, Europeans themselves have their own struggles. It's actually hard to develop and maintain a successful career that supports a comfortable western lifestyle. Tons of westerners are drowning in debt or struggling with working class jobs. Adding a family is even harder. And kids are very expensive in western societies. It baffles me that the NYT will argue that this African man with nineteen kids and zero job skills, it's the imperative of working class families in Germany to shoulder the burden, provide money, schooling, housing, education, etc.

The New York Times problems may be lurching toward a solution. They have struggled with their business model, as evidenced by the space reductions (accompanied by layoffs) discussed in the linked article. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of trolls.

Bizarrely, this feeds into the African/American Negro belief that whites have magical powers that they use to keep blacks poor--they actually manipulate the weather to the disadvantage of Africans/Negroes.

they actually manipulate the weather to the disadvantage of Africans/Negroes

First world problem: do not upset the natives by telling them that their actions are harmful. They fuck too much and that causes pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases and other ills that do not respect quaint borders.

Third world problem: I am hungry

NGO solution: no birth control advice as that is cultural imperialism. Write a grant proposal to solicit free money to resettle afflicted people, add gratuitous photographs of children.

When did truth become a casualty?

My understanding is that all manner of govts and NGOs shower myriad forms of birth control on Africans – which they don’t use.

- could she understand, that this was a big step for catholic theology, to abandon the ages-old Moses 9, 7 imperative - Be fruitful and multiply!" - -?

And it's not only Catholic theology - there's lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Plus: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is improving the reproductive rates whereever they are active in medical help for Africa, because by concentrating on financing medical help, they - want it or not - improve birthrates.

I just can't see, that they get this - even though Steve Sailer pointed out lately, that Bill Gates was able to think things over, if something that he organizes doesn't have the right outcome.

“And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well. And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.”

And yet, Catholic countries from Italy to Brazil (the latter has plenty of Evangelicals, too) have managed to tame their population growth substantially (in the case of Italy, perhaps disastrously so). The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old, but they’re surrounded by Muslims, some of them quite hostile, so if the Christians follow the Italian model while the Muslims bide their time, it likely won’t end well for them.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you’ll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

Much of the recent decline in fertility rates has to do with urbanization. Africa has one of the lowest urbanization rates in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country

Still religious teaching and lobbying has a huge effect on fertility rates:

Hemispheric Open Borders Trial Run: Puerto Rico

If religious teaching has no effect on fertility rates, and all discussion on this topic can be just reduced to mat[t]ers of biology and explained by human biodiversity, how do you explain large Mormon families, when Mormonism is one of the ”whitest” religions in the U.S. ( the flock being 85% non-Hispanic White, and being predominately of British ancestry http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/27/the-most-and-least-racially-diverse-u-s-religious-groups/ )? [...] I think you are greatly underestimating the social, economic and political power and impact of organized religion on society, in particular the power of the Catholic Church when it comes to lobbying for all sorts of Catholic doctrine-inspired policies on reproduction, etc. [...] It took the government of the Philippines 13 years to force through legislation to allow government-funded contraception and for sex education in schools because of the strength of the opposition of the Catholic Church there

But this just happened recently, January 2016: Philippines axes contraceptive budget

Funds earmarked by Benigno Aquino scrapped despite law mandating state provision of birth control to the poor https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/06/philippines-axes-contraceptive-budget-birth-control

THE EFFECT OF URBANIZATION ON CHINA’S FERTILITY*

http://paa2012.princeton.edu/papers/120365

The relationship between urbanization and fertility decline is known to be inverse in developed countries. However, the nature of this relationship in developing countries that already have relatively low fertilities is not well-understood. This study aims to illustrate how much urbanization contributed to China’s fertility decline between 1982-2008 and forecasts how much it can contribute to future reductions in fertility. The study examines changes in the total fertility rate (TFR) at both the national and provincial levels, given regional differences in the urbanization rate. The results show that changes in rural fertility behavior accounted for most of the decline in the national TFR between 1982 and 2008. This finding suggests that official birth control policies were instrumental in curbing China’s population growth. However, urbanization was responsible for about 22 percent of the decrease in TFR during this period, and its effect was especially important during the latter years (2001-2008). In most provinces, urbanization associated with a decline in provincial-level fertility. The forecasts indicate that urbanization will become the primary factor behind future declines in national fertility. Given the negative effect of urbanization on the TFR, it is possible to relax the one-child policy without having adverse implications for population growth.

"The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old,"

From the Bay Area sample I have seen of Filipino Catholic families, they tend to have less kids on average than Hispanic Catholics. One thing Filipinos in The U.S have adopted from White Americans is not having a shitload of kids. These must be the cream of the crop Filipinos. The Filipino Talented Tenth come to America. We are not getting Central America and Mexico's Talented Tenth. They are not sending us their best.

Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population. Fun fact: part of the Persian antipathy toward Arabs is a knowledge/shunning of this African admixture. You'll hear how Persians are "actually Aryan" and many choice terms for Arabs (like "sand n***").

“Saudis have significant sub-Saharan African DNA, about 10% on average if I recall, as a result of the slave trade. African women were enslaved too, and their mixed offspring married into the population.”

Surprisingly, Saudis actually have more paternal than maternal Sub-Saharan ancestry, based on the studies I’ve seen.

- could she understand, that this was a big step for catholic theology, to abandon the ages-old Moses 9, 7 imperative - Be fruitful and multiply!" - -?

And it's not only Catholic theology - there's lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Plus: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is improving the reproductive rates whereever they are active in medical help for Africa, because by concentrating on financing medical help, they - want it or not - improve birthrates.

I just can't see, that they get this - even though Steve Sailer pointed out lately, that Bill Gates was able to think things over, if something that he organizes doesn't have the right outcome.

Mr. Kief,

have you heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200 before?:

The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to US national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development.

And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

The Vatican’s Role in the World Population Crisis: The Untold Story

On November 26, 1975, the 227-page report and its recommendations were endorsed by President Ford. However, none of them were ever implemented. The Vatican moved swiftly to intervene, and all efforts were very quietly subverted.

On November 20, 1975, six days before Ford endorsed the recommendations, the U.S. Catholic bishops adopted a plan to build a political machine with the stated goal of passing a human rights amendment to the Constitution. This plan, which is represented by a printed document, describes the creation of the new right movement, including the Moral Majority. Within a period of only four years, almost the entire new right movement had been created. More recently, the bishops were the moving force behind the creation of the Christian Coalition to replace the Moral Majority, which had fallen into public disrepute.

Issued more than a quarter century after the first plan was released in 1975, the 2001 “Pastoral Plan for Pro-Life Activities: A Campaign in Support of Life” relies heavily on statements from Pope John Paul II’s 1995 encyclical, The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae), and the 1998 statement by the bishops, Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics.

I have a theory – admittedly it is a bit ‘kooky’ – that Ted Cruz and his father are part of this Pastoral Plan, that took over and infiltrated Protestant denominations as part of a Vatican-led and -directed pro-life Christian coalition:

[...]The Plan has taken the protest out of the Protestant movement. Until the Pastoral Plan, Protestant denominations had no reservations about protesting or criticizing the Catholic Church. The plan specifically targeted the Protestant Churches to silence them. The bishops succeeded.[...]

I personally consider Ted Cruz and his father to be crypto-Catholics and opportunist/fake Evangelicals. Maybe they are even Vatican agents?:

Cruz left the Roman Catholic Church in 1975 [ This could just be a coincidence, but the Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities was released the same year.] and became an Evangelical Christian after attending a Bible study with a colleague and having a born again experience. Explaining his leaving the Catholic church, Cruz stated in an interview with National Review, “The people at the Bible study had a peace that I could not understand, this peace in the midst of trouble. I knew I needed to find that peace by finding Jesus Christ.” Following his conversion, his son and wife also became born-again Christians. [...] About his political involvements in the 1980s, Cruz reflected, “I was on the state board of the Religious Roundtable, a Christian and Jewish religious organization that worked to elect Ronald Reagan.” At the time, he told his son, “God has destined you for greatness.”[17][30]

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran's population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs.

Oh believe me I know, just noting the Persian self-conception. Their civilization rivaled ancient Greece, then floundered after Arab invasions and Islam.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

They're both real reasons. The left's dirty little secret is that they're run by and for plutocrats.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want–generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.
Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

Without all the millions of foreign workers flooding the labor market, American wages will rise.

You on the left have a lot more delusions than the alt-right (this ain't exactly GOP central, here) does.

I'm extreme right, and I've been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

That’s an interesting perspective. It seems to me for a while we had a dichotomy of:
Democrat – government dictates to business (with lip service to the people)
Republican – business dominates (with lip service to the people, a different set of preferred issues though)
with nationalism and/or populism being down the list of priorities (R more of the former, D more the latter). I do kind of agree with your last sentence, it’s just that I don’t think we see that much in practice anymore (until Trump?).

IMHO This no longer applies after our last election cycle. The Democrats have swung to a much more corporatist POV (now they only act against business that does not fund them) and DemE (i.e. not the Berners) barely pays lip service to the people anymore (except for identity politics) and is much more warlike internationally. I find the GOPe (i.e. Never Trump) a hard to describe mix of old R and D-lite with Trump a hard to describe (and yet to be fully revealed) mix of old R/D with a substantial helping of both nationalism and populism.

Trump has obviously shaken things up, but it is by no means clear yet how things will settle out.

Perhaps you could expand on your paragraph that I quoted? I’m interested in a more detailed take.

P.S. I hope the above was coherent. I probably should not post while ill, but I was too intrigued by your point to pass.

Mainstream social scientists are largely in agreement that urbanisation is the main factor slowing birth rates in other parts of the world. So why aren’t they advising western aid agencies to only send aid and assistance to Africans living in cities? Too much aid seems to be going to rural villagers, who are the ones having the most babies.

A shift back to protectionism would also be helpful, as inefficient third world factories are a good way to soak up surplus rural labour.

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran's population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran’s population can pass for Scandinavians.

Check the etymology of the words Aryan and Iran and get back to us.

Maybe you could also enlighten us as to why Farsi is in the Indo-European language group. When you’re done you can look at a map and note what lies directly between India and Europe.

Maybe you could also enlighten us as to why Farsi is in the Indo-European language group. When you’re done you can look at a map and note what lies directly between India and Europe."

Persian American Pick Up Artist Roosh V says that whenever he travels to Latin America he is more often times assumed to be a Local than he is a Gringo, because he has darker features than White Americans of Northern European descent so he physically sticks out less. If a person can easily be mistaken for a Hispanic based on phenotype than that person is not an Aryan. Aryans look like they came out straight out of Sweden.

One of the ways the modern environmentalist movement sold its soul (& shredded its credibility) was to disavow the merits of stabilizing population levels in developed (or at least western) countries. This disavowal took two forms at when talking to mainstream or leftist audiences:
1) We don’t have the moral authority to exclude newcomers until we first live more modestly, shrinking our environmental footprint to an ideal which which will be exemplary. Only then can we go to the next level, and be virtuous enough to even deserve a stable population or have the moral authority to control immigration.

2) Diversity is enriching, is our strength, blah blah.

Argument #1 got bandied about first when Diversity was less of a component of liberal dogma. I think Argument #1 will be completely jettisoned now, because Argument #2 is more effective at Silencing people.
Mostly Argument #1 was just an early version of white guilt, white privilege shaming which was a useful tactic at muddying the waters, and stalling for time. Now that immigrant levels have become so high, diversity is close to becoming sacrosanct, thus Argument #2 just cuts off debate.
Ultimately, Argument #1 was just a useful distraction for plausible deniability that open borders enthusiasts did not have anti-western animus or really wish to use mass immigration to elect a new people.

I think there needs to be a lot more examination of how the American environmental movement went from essentially all in for zero population growth as recently as the 90s to essentially open borders today. The huge, 'strings attached' donation to the Sierra Club in the late 90s was one factor and push, but definitely not the only one.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Without going details, if you could have prevented the world population explosion -which as this post points out is pretty much just happening in Africa and the Middle East at the present- you could have prevented most of the damage to the biosphere, even if you did absolutely nothing else to control pollution. On the other hand, any environmentalist program that does not include population control is pretty much useless.

This is so obvious that they threw away their credibility on the rest of their program.

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran's population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

All the ethnic Persian haplogroups are basically indo European, they are more white than the Jews or people like Steve jobs, Lisa jobs, or john abizaid.

Japan doesn’t have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why? Those are advanced, First World nations for the most part. Certainly compared to Gambia.

White women basically just don’t like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

In places like China, Japan, and South Korea, women who don’t have kids (most of them) have the Kawai stuff to keep them occupied, competing with each other over the “cutest” outfits and fashion and such and not really engaged in massive sluttery combined with rage over the few Alpha dudes not commiting to said sluts or too many beta males around.

To quote Roissy, women invite, and men invade. Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

We need to have more pride in our heritage, more festivals and parties celebrating White America, and give White women “cute” things to occupy themselves instead Miley Cyrus type sluttery.

White women basically just don’t like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

Yes look at Sweden and see who owns Swedish media, down to every last mainstream outlet. Merkel is a childless anomaly putting 'we are the world' ahead of her own people.

Japan doesn’t have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why?

Answer: Next to no Jewish influence on media and culture. Plenty of Korean and Japanese women with jungle fever though, going by military base reports. Wonder why their desires made no policy changes? Could it be that policy is set by plutocratic interests rather than sexual needs of adventuresses?

But no, let's look at the presence/absence of Kawai to explain cultural differences.

Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

"Women" didn't. Are women the key writers of the Economist, Financial Times, NYT, WashPost, CNN stories on immigration? Are women the main lobbyists, the majority of politicians greenlighting mass-immigration?

Dongle lady incidentally was biracial/black and looking to stick it to whitey. About 10% of white women in Europe are the bozos you write of. The rest are dealing with reduced freedoms, street harrassment, and cultural confusion.

You've seen the youtube video by the 16 y.o. German girl imploring Merkel to stop the refugee invasion? That was censored by Facebook and Twitter. Discussion is strictly limited and it comes from top-down -- from media conglomerates, from political leaders, not from the woman on the street.

Roissy is right about enough to be dangerous. Then he goes incoherent. His premises miss menopausal and maternal women, who are less endorphin and more oxytocin mediated in their responses. He forgets that women want to see family features in their offspring. Mothers of biracial children are often disappointed there's no resemblance, or that they're assumed to be a babysitter. Adventuresses are a special group, endorphin-led and often compensating for a poor upbringing, not the jump-off point for generalizing about women if you appreciate accuracy.

Following the Jewish influence, though -- that's a far better predictive model on immigration than any of Roissy's ideas.

When I was in my twenties I read books on overpopulation - books by Borgstrom and Erlich. In their apocalyptic visions all nations and all races suffered from overpopulation. I can't remember if any of those doom-sayers ever predicted a world where most the world got its population under control and one region - Africa had a population explosion.

So the pattern we see today was not recognized by the pessimistic futurists. That means I am free to make any wild ass prognostication I want.

The obvious remedy that that springs to mind is a return of genocide as a public policy. Europe and the Americas will first build walls like the one Donald Trump keeps promising. But soon the nations which most of bear the burden of the migrating Africans may go to the source of the excess people.

In previous centuries there were two routes for black slaves out of Africa. There was the passage by ship across the Atlantic, and there was the path across the Sahara. The path to the Islamic states of the Middle East was we are told the larger path. More blacks died crossing the Sahara than died in the slave ships. One reason this was true was that the Muslim slave traders routinely castrated the men and boys.

Today there are not many blacks in the Middle East in spite of their long history of importing black slaves in great numbers. Middle Eastern Muslims don't seem to want Sub-Saharan blacks in their nations. And they have had little compunction about sterilizing them or simply murdering them.

The path out of Africa to the Asian supercontinent on foot runs through the Middle East. The Muslim nations then act as a bottle stopper holding the blacks in. But it may also mean that the Muslim nations will relieve the pressure by actively reducing the number of blacks in Africa.

There are several areas that would be interested in reducing the population of blacks in Africa. First there is China. China is probably too distant from Africa to worry about an direct invasion of blacks. China is active in black Africa and may have imperial ambitions but probably not soon. China has its own population problems. I expect Europe to 'lock down' with physical and legal walls. The Americas have an ocean between us. Many liberals and African-Americans in the US will probably argue for mass immigration from Africa to here but I expect that that appeal will be rejected.

That leaves the Islamic Middle East. Africans can walk to and through the Middle East - they did it 50,000 years ago. So they are most at risk from too many African blacks. So in the near future I'm sort of predicting that the ISIS radicals will pivot away from conquering Europe and the US and develop some new interpretation of the Koran that requires them to kill large numbers of Africans.

This is my theory of how the world will react to the population explosion in Africa. It took me about twenty minutes to devise and develop. I think it is as plausible as any vision that Erlich ever had.

If post 1945 past and present are any sort of guide or yardstick for predicting future policies, then it is exceedingly likely that the European nations, the western ones at any rate, will implement ‘liberal’ Economist style immigration ‘policies’ and will positively invite in as many black Africans as possible.

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran's population can pass for Scandinavians. The Whitest Persians can pass for Greeks for example.

I have been to Los Angeles which has a large Persian population and they definitely have very distinct phenotypes from Northern European WASPs. Persians in Los Angeles tend to be mistaken for either Mexicans, Arabs, Jews, or Armenians, but never WASPs.

Wrong.

Iranians and Indians, for that matter, have the rightful and true claim on the word ‘Aryan’ – it’s their word and their history. ‘Aryan’ , originally, before 19th century European academics got hold of the word, was the self designation of the Steppic people of central Asia who invaded India and Iran and who imposed their language and culture. Thus the word has been used continuously as a self designation by upper caste Indians and Iranians ever since. So to speak of ‘blond Aryans’ is as nonsensical as to speak of a ‘blond language’.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

Right, but how much of that signature remains in the heavily arabized Persians today? One can recognize historical migrations without thinking the descendants are representative (due to invasion and admixture).

Iranians and Indians, for that matter, have the rightful and true claim on the word 'Aryan' - it's their word and their history. 'Aryan' , originally, before 19th century European academics got hold of the word, was the self designation of the Steppic people of central Asia who invaded India and Iran and who imposed their language and culture. Thus the word has been used continuously as a self designation by upper caste Indians and Iranians ever since. So to speak of 'blond Aryans' is as nonsensical as to speak of a 'blond language'.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

Are you talking about the Tocharians? Because DNA analysis of the Tarim mummies shows that only the male line is white while the female line is almost exclusively East Asian.

Yes, NYT will strain every muscle to blame the ills of Africa on whites in Europe and the US.

With the problems in the middle east, the NYT and similar liberals blame the wars and conflict on whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. How are all these battles between rival Islamic extremists in MENA the fault of Christians in Europe and the US and Australia? That doesn't make sense.

With all the problems of sub-saharan Africa and Haiti, it makes even less sense to blame everything on the whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia. In fact, it's obviously ridiculous. NYT is doing it anyway. 1.5 degrees of warming is not causing all the problems of Sub-Saharan Africa.

The other lie, is that whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia benefit from explosive ethnic diversity so it is imperative to engage in hyper immigration to deliver these benefits to needy whites in Europe/US/Canada/Australia.

The biggest lie is on birth rates. Whites used to have tons of children, now they have very few. This isn't advanced technology. People know how to make babies. But these are obviously controlled by culture and social norms. The lie is that these birth rates can't be changed. Of course they can. If NYT and WaPo and the president used the Bully Pulpit to drill different cultural norms into peoples heads, it is actually easy to do.

A recent Sailer article quoted a NYT story about a man from Africa with 19 children who had to immigrate to Europe to enroll in social assistance because he had no means to care for his 19 children. The article was sympathetic to the man and horrified that Europeans would support immigration restrictions. The comment section, even the NYT commenters, were horrified. Meanwhile, Europeans themselves have their own struggles. It's actually hard to develop and maintain a successful career that supports a comfortable western lifestyle. Tons of westerners are drowning in debt or struggling with working class jobs. Adding a family is even harder. And kids are very expensive in western societies. It baffles me that the NYT will argue that this African man with nineteen kids and zero job skills, it's the imperative of working class families in Germany to shoulder the burden, provide money, schooling, housing, education, etc.

The single biggest factor affecting the native birthrate is the cost of housing. People won’t start families if they don’t have a secure place to live. This is fundamental.

One of the ways the modern environmentalist movement sold its soul (& shredded its credibility) was to disavow the merits of stabilizing population levels in developed (or at least western) countries. This disavowal took two forms at when talking to mainstream or leftist audiences:
1) We don't have the moral authority to exclude newcomers until we first live more modestly, shrinking our environmental footprint to an ideal which which will be exemplary. Only then can we go to the next level, and be virtuous enough to even deserve a stable population or have the moral authority to control immigration.

2) Diversity is enriching, is our strength, blah blah.

Argument #1 got bandied about first when Diversity was less of a component of liberal dogma. I think Argument #1 will be completely jettisoned now, because Argument #2 is more effective at Silencing people.
Mostly Argument #1 was just an early version of white guilt, white privilege shaming which was a useful tactic at muddying the waters, and stalling for time. Now that immigrant levels have become so high, diversity is close to becoming sacrosanct, thus Argument #2 just cuts off debate.
Ultimately, Argument #1 was just a useful distraction for plausible deniability that open borders enthusiasts did not have anti-western animus or really wish to use mass immigration to elect a new people.

This is an extremely perceptive comment.

I think there needs to be a lot more examination of how the American environmental movement went from essentially all in for zero population growth as recently as the 90s to essentially open borders today. The huge, ‘strings attached’ donation to the Sierra Club in the late 90s was one factor and push, but definitely not the only one.

Opposition to a population focus within environmentalism came way before Gelbaum. The first big proponent of the argument: "population control is just a distraction - our real focus should be on technology and consumption levels..." was Barry Commoner in 1970.
Commoner was an early adversary of Paul Ehrlich, and he did probably more harm than anyone in the period 1970-85 (then Julian Simon appeared) towards pushing population stabilization out of the consensus. Commoner was definitely the first omen of the white privilege/white guilt shaming since his rhetoric often talked of (paraphrase), 'throwing poor people of the 3rd world overboard while western nations still live in decadence'.

"Our women want BBC and not just on television. We must open the floodgates!"

Sorry no. "What women want" is Freudian dithering, not a policy concern. And women generally speaking don't want sub-literate migrants fathering their children. Especially those from the most AIDS-infected region of the world.

East Asian men (punching bag of PUAs) outperform Monkey men when it comes to White women. The fixation on Monkey men I suspect links to watching too much porn and other forms of Negrophilia that apparently keeps popping among the Alt Right.

One of the ways the modern environmentalist movement sold its soul (& shredded its credibility) was to disavow the merits of stabilizing population levels in developed (or at least western) countries. This disavowal took two forms at when talking to mainstream or leftist audiences:
1) We don't have the moral authority to exclude newcomers until we first live more modestly, shrinking our environmental footprint to an ideal which which will be exemplary. Only then can we go to the next level, and be virtuous enough to even deserve a stable population or have the moral authority to control immigration.

2) Diversity is enriching, is our strength, blah blah.

Argument #1 got bandied about first when Diversity was less of a component of liberal dogma. I think Argument #1 will be completely jettisoned now, because Argument #2 is more effective at Silencing people.
Mostly Argument #1 was just an early version of white guilt, white privilege shaming which was a useful tactic at muddying the waters, and stalling for time. Now that immigrant levels have become so high, diversity is close to becoming sacrosanct, thus Argument #2 just cuts off debate.
Ultimately, Argument #1 was just a useful distraction for plausible deniability that open borders enthusiasts did not have anti-western animus or really wish to use mass immigration to elect a new people.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Without going details, if you could have prevented the world population explosion -which as this post points out is pretty much just happening in Africa and the Middle East at the present- you could have prevented most of the damage to the biosphere, even if you did absolutely nothing else to control pollution. On the other hand, any environmentalist program that does not include population control is pretty much useless.

This is so obvious that they threw away their credibility on the rest of their program.

A lot of that caving to wealthy donors was a nod to their ethnic grievances, Ellis Island nostalgia (Gelbaum & Sierra Cl). The Libertarian attack on environmentalists was really a guise to conceal a thirst for short term profits (real estate flipping, selling more toilet paper at Target) by crony capitalists. The basic fail in US conservatism since 1980 is thinking that developing the low hanging fruit of turning farmland into suburban sprawl was a somehow noble enterprise. Meanwhile the Japanese, Taiwanese & Koreans were developing their electronics, exports.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Everything the modern "left" does is done at the behest of the wealthy people and corporations who fund them.

Japan doesn't have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why? Those are advanced, First World nations for the most part. Certainly compared to Gambia.

White women basically just don't like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

In places like China, Japan, and South Korea, women who don't have kids (most of them) have the Kawai stuff to keep them occupied, competing with each other over the "cutest" outfits and fashion and such and not really engaged in massive sluttery combined with rage over the few Alpha dudes not commiting to said sluts or too many beta males around.

To quote Roissy, women invite, and men invade. Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

We need to have more pride in our heritage, more festivals and parties celebrating White America, and give White women "cute" things to occupy themselves instead Miley Cyrus type sluttery.

White women basically just don’t like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

Yes look at Sweden and see who owns Swedish media, down to every last mainstream outlet. Merkel is a childless anomaly putting ‘we are the world’ ahead of her own people.

Japan doesn’t have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why?

Answer: Next to no Jewish influence on media and culture. Plenty of Korean and Japanese women with jungle fever though, going by military base reports. Wonder why their desires made no policy changes? Could it be that policy is set by plutocratic interests rather than sexual needs of adventuresses?

But no, let’s look at the presence/absence of Kawai to explain cultural differences.

Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

“Women” didn’t. Are women the key writers of the Economist, Financial Times, NYT, WashPost, CNN stories on immigration? Are women the main lobbyists, the majority of politicians greenlighting mass-immigration?

Dongle lady incidentally was biracial/black and looking to stick it to whitey. About 10% of white women in Europe are the bozos you write of. The rest are dealing with reduced freedoms, street harrassment, and cultural confusion.

You’ve seen the youtube video by the 16 y.o. German girl imploring Merkel to stop the refugee invasion? That was censored by Facebook and Twitter. Discussion is strictly limited and it comes from top-down — from media conglomerates, from political leaders, not from the woman on the street.

Roissy is right about enough to be dangerous. Then he goes incoherent. His premises miss menopausal and maternal women, who are less endorphin and more oxytocin mediated in their responses. He forgets that women want to see family features in their offspring. Mothers of biracial children are often disappointed there’s no resemblance, or that they’re assumed to be a babysitter. Adventuresses are a special group, endorphin-led and often compensating for a poor upbringing, not the jump-off point for generalizing about women if you appreciate accuracy.

Following the Jewish influence, though — that’s a far better predictive model on immigration than any of Roissy’s ideas.

"And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well. And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this."

And yet, Catholic countries from Italy to Brazil (the latter has plenty of Evangelicals, too) have managed to tame their population growth substantially (in the case of Italy, perhaps disastrously so). The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old, but they're surrounded by Muslims, some of them quite hostile, so if the Christians follow the Italian model while the Muslims bide their time, it likely won't end well for them.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you'll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

Still religious teaching and lobbying has a huge effect on fertility rates:

Hemispheric Open Borders Trial Run: Puerto Rico

If religious teaching has no effect on fertility rates, and all discussion on this topic can be just reduced to mat[t]ers of biology and explained by human biodiversity, how do you explain large Mormon families, when Mormonism is one of the ”whitest” religions in the U.S. ( the flock being 85% non-Hispanic White, and being predominately of British ancestry http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/27/the-most-and-least-racially-diverse-u-s-religious-groups/ )? [...] I think you are greatly underestimating the social, economic and political power and impact of organized religion on society, in particular the power of the Catholic Church when it comes to lobbying for all sorts of Catholic doctrine-inspired policies on reproduction, etc. [...] It took the government of the Philippines 13 years to force through legislation to allow government-funded contraception and for sex education in schools because of the strength of the opposition of the Catholic Church there

The relationship between urbanization and fertility decline is known to be inverse in developed countries. However, the nature of this relationship in developing countries that already have relatively low fertilities is not well-understood. This study aims to illustrate how much urbanization contributed to China’s fertility decline between 1982-2008 and forecasts how much it can contribute to future reductions in fertility. The study examines changes in the total fertility rate (TFR) at both the national and provincial levels, given
regional differences in the urbanization rate. The results show that changes in rural
fertility behavior accounted for most of the decline in the national TFR between 1982 and
2008. This finding suggests that official birth control policies were instrumental in curbing China’s population growth. However, urbanization was responsible for about 22
percent of the decrease in TFR during this period, and its effect was especially important
during the latter years (2001-2008). In most provinces, urbanization associated with a decline in provincial-level fertility. The forecasts indicate that urbanization will become
the primary factor behind future declines in national fertility. Given the negative effect of
urbanization on the TFR, it is possible to relax the one-child policy without having
adverse implications for population growth.

Africa's fertility bomb is not a secret: as a friend of mine who worked there put it, "They f*** like rabbits!" That also explains their AIDS rates. And by the way, if you look at a map color-coded in proportion to the legal penalty for sodomy in Africa and one color-coded in proportion to HIV-positive rates, the two are very nearly complementary. But of course God forbid we should suggest that decriminalization of man-on-man sex is anything less than an essential step in the fight against AIDS: it would be sacrilegious to stop funneling the money I work my white arse off for so black homos in Africa can keep getting it in theirs with the promise of a cure.

Much of the spreading aids is also because of the way they have sex. The men insist on dry vaginal sex. If a woman is wet then she is a slut. Women actually rub dirt and sawdust on their vaginas to help dry it up before sex.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Does the article even bother to mention any prediction models of what their agriculture would look like at 0.7 degrees cooler? I'm not going to bother to check, but I bet I know the answer. Shit article, shit journalist, shit newspaper.

The man made changes to their environment are caused buy themselves. Not good to cut all the trees down in any climate. That is what took down the Aztecs and other north and south American civilizations.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want--generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

I have made this point before, its all about creating consumers. Africans in huts in Africa don’t by the everyday things that keep economies growing. They don’t by things like toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste, etc. So even if they come over here and don’t get a job and be successful, they will still be provided funds from the wests social programs to be consumers. To pay for they just raise taxes on us working stiffs. Either way the merchandise gets purchased keeps the stock market afloat.

I think wealth is kinda like an ocean current, it starts at the top and travels on down and as it does it picks up more money as travels back around and is much bigger when it get back to the top.

I have made this point before, its all about creating consumers. Africans in huts in Africa don’t by the everyday things that keep economies growing. They don’t by things like toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste, etc. So even if they come over here and don’t get a job and be successful, they will still be provided funds from the wests social programs to be consumers. To pay for they just raise taxes on us working stiffs. Either way the merchandise gets purchased keeps the stock market afloat.

exactly....also, the establishment also loves third world immigrants because they have more kids than the native americans/europeans...also, more immigrants work than are given credit for on sites like this one and similar sites...yes, more are on welfare, but many immigrants do work...and every worker is a consumer...and as you point out, the corporations don't care if fewer immigrants work than natives...welfare paid for by natives means the immigrants are consumers anyway....that should be an obvious point and easy to see...but apparently not...

To the extent they are consumers, it’s because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants’ social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

If you will listen and pay attention to the Pols they actually say that money should be given to the indigent because they spend the money the fastest and therefore provide the greatest stimulus to the "economy". Money that trickles down to the working class through jobs programs is not as stimulative because they tend to save a little bit of it.

This is all encompassed in Modern Monetary Theory. MMT will work, but only as long as the government has massive power and can keep inflation in check once people are wise to the game. When the day comes that the people are wise to the game the government will realize that the unproductive masses are a liability, not an asset, and things will get interesting.

Note I wrote “lower-income”, but you can approximate the effect of them being indigent by requiring the money only be spent on consumption, e.g., they get $5k only after presenting receipts worth $5k.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West.

That doesn't make much sense economically, given the tiny percentage of recent migrants in Europe who work. To the extent they are consumers, it's because governments have given them money to spend. European countries could get a similar boost to consumption without the migrants' social costs, just by printing the same amount of money and giving it to their own lower-income citizens.

Printing money doesn’t create wealth it just dilutes it and causes an equal amount of inflation.

"And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well. And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this."

And yet, Catholic countries from Italy to Brazil (the latter has plenty of Evangelicals, too) have managed to tame their population growth substantially (in the case of Italy, perhaps disastrously so). The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old, but they're surrounded by Muslims, some of them quite hostile, so if the Christians follow the Italian model while the Muslims bide their time, it likely won't end well for them.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you'll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you’ll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

Iranians and Indians, for that matter, have the rightful and true claim on the word 'Aryan' - it's their word and their history. 'Aryan' , originally, before 19th century European academics got hold of the word, was the self designation of the Steppic people of central Asia who invaded India and Iran and who imposed their language and culture. Thus the word has been used continuously as a self designation by upper caste Indians and Iranians ever since. So to speak of 'blond Aryans' is as nonsensical as to speak of a 'blond language'.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

However, recent DNA studies of ancient remains of the original Steppic Aryan peoples reveal that they were more or less genetically identical to modern north east Europeans.

Right, but how much of that signature remains in the heavily arabized Persians today? One can recognize historical migrations without thinking the descendants are representative (due to invasion and admixture).

Aryan = Blond/Blonde, so that disqualifies Persians from being Aryans. Zero percent of Iran’s population can pass for Scandinavians.

Check the etymology of the words Aryan and Iran and get back to us.

Maybe you could also enlighten us as to why Farsi is in the Indo-European language group. When you're done you can look at a map and note what lies directly between India and Europe.

“Check the etymology of the words Aryan and Iran and get back to us.

Maybe you could also enlighten us as to why Farsi is in the Indo-European language group. When you’re done you can look at a map and note what lies directly between India and Europe.”

Persian American Pick Up Artist Roosh V says that whenever he travels to Latin America he is more often times assumed to be a Local than he is a Gringo, because he has darker features than White Americans of Northern European descent so he physically sticks out less. If a person can easily be mistaken for a Hispanic based on phenotype than that person is not an Aryan. Aryans look like they came out straight out of Sweden.

"And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well. And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this."

And yet, Catholic countries from Italy to Brazil (the latter has plenty of Evangelicals, too) have managed to tame their population growth substantially (in the case of Italy, perhaps disastrously so). The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old, but they're surrounded by Muslims, some of them quite hostile, so if the Christians follow the Italian model while the Muslims bide their time, it likely won't end well for them.

In any case, to the extent that Africa is different, you'll need to do more than point fingers at Catholics and Evangelicals in order to explain why.

“The Philippines is still producing babies like the Catholics of old,”

From the Bay Area sample I have seen of Filipino Catholic families, they tend to have less kids on average than Hispanic Catholics. One thing Filipinos in The U.S have adopted from White Americans is not having a shitload of kids. These must be the cream of the crop Filipinos. The Filipino Talented Tenth come to America. We are not getting Central America and Mexico’s Talented Tenth. They are not sending us their best.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Without going details, if you could have prevented the world population explosion -which as this post points out is pretty much just happening in Africa and the Middle East at the present- you could have prevented most of the damage to the biosphere, even if you did absolutely nothing else to control pollution. On the other hand, any environmentalist program that does not include population control is pretty much useless.

This is so obvious that they threw away their credibility on the rest of their program.

A lot of that caving to wealthy donors was a nod to their ethnic grievances, Ellis Island nostalgia (Gelbaum & Sierra Cl). The Libertarian attack on environmentalists was really a guise to conceal a thirst for short term profits (real estate flipping, selling more toilet paper at Target) by crony capitalists. The basic fail in US conservatism since 1980 is thinking that developing the low hanging fruit of turning farmland into suburban sprawl was a somehow noble enterprise. Meanwhile the Japanese, Taiwanese & Koreans were developing their electronics, exports.

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

They're both real reasons. The left's dirty little secret is that they're run by and for plutocrats.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want–generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.
Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

Without all the millions of foreign workers flooding the labor market, American wages will rise.

You on the left have a lot more delusions than the alt-right (this ain't exactly GOP central, here) does.

I'm extreme right, and I've been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

Whether it’s right-wing or not nationalism dictating to business sounds like a good plan to me.

For those of us who “know” — that picture and the future it represents are truly horrifying.

As somebody said in ythe comments section the last time Steve posted an article on this topic…..say goodbye to Africa’s big game animals. Get as many as possible into zoos…..you won’t find them in Africa in forty yrs

Japan doesn't have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why? Those are advanced, First World nations for the most part. Certainly compared to Gambia.

White women basically just don't like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

In places like China, Japan, and South Korea, women who don't have kids (most of them) have the Kawai stuff to keep them occupied, competing with each other over the "cutest" outfits and fashion and such and not really engaged in massive sluttery combined with rage over the few Alpha dudes not commiting to said sluts or too many beta males around.

To quote Roissy, women invite, and men invade. Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

We need to have more pride in our heritage, more festivals and parties celebrating White America, and give White women "cute" things to occupy themselves instead Miley Cyrus type sluttery.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Without going details, if you could have prevented the world population explosion -which as this post points out is pretty much just happening in Africa and the Middle East at the present- you could have prevented most of the damage to the biosphere, even if you did absolutely nothing else to control pollution. On the other hand, any environmentalist program that does not include population control is pretty much useless.

This is so obvious that they threw away their credibility on the rest of their program.

The environmentalist movement self-sabotaged by dropping its position on population control, which AFAICT was done at the insistence of the wealthy people and corporations funding the environmentalist organizations.

Everything the modern “left” does is done at the behest of the wealthy people and corporations who fund them.

Whenever I read thins like "They do it because the rains have become so fickle, the days measurably hotter..." I do a little Googling to see if perhaps the temperature has indeed spiked a few degrees recently, only to find:

Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures warmed roughly 1.53 degrees Fahrenheit (0.85 degrees Celsius) from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 3 of the 2013 summary report).

Apparently that 1.53 degrees F explains a great many catastrophes.

Cities are hotter than farmland; farmland is hotter than forest. So I don’t think there’s any question that more human activity = higher temperatures. But I don’t think it’s because of coal-fired plants in China or commuters in the US.

White women basically just don’t like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

Yes look at Sweden and see who owns Swedish media, down to every last mainstream outlet. Merkel is a childless anomaly putting 'we are the world' ahead of her own people.

Japan doesn’t have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why?

Answer: Next to no Jewish influence on media and culture. Plenty of Korean and Japanese women with jungle fever though, going by military base reports. Wonder why their desires made no policy changes? Could it be that policy is set by plutocratic interests rather than sexual needs of adventuresses?

But no, let's look at the presence/absence of Kawai to explain cultural differences.

Our women invited the invaders, and sure enough want to replace us. No one should have any illusions on that score. Its why women scream about dongle jokes by a nerd or a Hawaiian shirt with hula girls by a nerd. When they ignore rape and murder by illiterate Third World rapefugee goat herders.

"Women" didn't. Are women the key writers of the Economist, Financial Times, NYT, WashPost, CNN stories on immigration? Are women the main lobbyists, the majority of politicians greenlighting mass-immigration?

Dongle lady incidentally was biracial/black and looking to stick it to whitey. About 10% of white women in Europe are the bozos you write of. The rest are dealing with reduced freedoms, street harrassment, and cultural confusion.

You've seen the youtube video by the 16 y.o. German girl imploring Merkel to stop the refugee invasion? That was censored by Facebook and Twitter. Discussion is strictly limited and it comes from top-down -- from media conglomerates, from political leaders, not from the woman on the street.

Roissy is right about enough to be dangerous. Then he goes incoherent. His premises miss menopausal and maternal women, who are less endorphin and more oxytocin mediated in their responses. He forgets that women want to see family features in their offspring. Mothers of biracial children are often disappointed there's no resemblance, or that they're assumed to be a babysitter. Adventuresses are a special group, endorphin-led and often compensating for a poor upbringing, not the jump-off point for generalizing about women if you appreciate accuracy.

Following the Jewish influence, though -- that's a far better predictive model on immigration than any of Roissy's ideas.

I have made this point before, its all about creating consumers. Africans in huts in Africa don't by the everyday things that keep economies growing. They don't by things like toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste, etc. So even if they come over here and don't get a job and be successful, they will still be provided funds from the wests social programs to be consumers. To pay for they just raise taxes on us working stiffs. Either way the merchandise gets purchased keeps the stock market afloat.

I think wealth is kinda like an ocean current, it starts at the top and travels on down and as it does it picks up more money as travels back around and is much bigger when it get back to the top.

I have made this point before, its all about creating consumers. Africans in huts in Africa don’t by the everyday things that keep economies growing. They don’t by things like toilet paper, diapers, toothpaste, etc. So even if they come over here and don’t get a job and be successful, they will still be provided funds from the wests social programs to be consumers. To pay for they just raise taxes on us working stiffs. Either way the merchandise gets purchased keeps the stock market afloat.

exactly….also, the establishment also loves third world immigrants because they have more kids than the native americans/europeans…also, more immigrants work than are given credit for on sites like this one and similar sites…yes, more are on welfare, but many immigrants do work…and every worker is a consumer…and as you point out, the corporations don’t care if fewer immigrants work than natives…welfare paid for by natives means the immigrants are consumers anyway….that should be an obvious point and easy to see…but apparently not…

yes, the Leftist base are deluded. But so are the base of the Right. The Right base wants to blame the desire of the Left to get more democratic voters and replace whites.

But the real force behind the pro-immigration plank of the democratic party is economic/financial.

They're both real reasons. The left's dirty little secret is that they're run by and for plutocrats.

The big corporations want to cram more worker-consumers into the West because that is the only source of economic growth left in the West. And that growth is what keeps the debt-based ponzi scheme economy alive. And the Dems are just doing what the corporations want–generating pro-immigration propaganda to be used to manufacture consent for more immigration that will keep the ponzi economy alive.
Without the economic growth from immigration, the economy will crash, and rich folks would lose wealth. And that is a bad thing.

You on the Right like to make fun of the deluded Left. Look in the mirror from time to time. You have your own delusions.

Without all the millions of foreign workers flooding the labor market, American wages will rise.

You on the left have a lot more delusions than the alt-right (this ain't exactly GOP central, here) does.

I'm extreme right, and I've been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

I’m extreme right, and I’ve been saying for years that either the country dominates business interests, or business interests dominate the country. Nationalism dictating to business sounds pretty right-wing to me.

That’s not “extreme right” at all. It’s just the old lefty J.K. Galbraith’s theory of countervailing power: that strong democratic institutions are necessary to balance the power of big business

There’s a lot of cui bono talk on the alt right – and some of it is accurate, or at least valid – but this issue is the ultimate proof that such analysis doesn’t get us to the nub of the problem. The truth is that no-one benefits from black people outbreeding everyone else and taking over the world. The fat Somalian who I used to pass every day on my way to work with his bum out, chewing Qat and shouting at people was not providing cheap labour to anyone.

What we are dealing with is the consequence of (a) a fringe cult becoming the dominant religious ethos of our time through a series of historical accidents and (b) democratic/republican systems creating chronically bad incentive structures i.e. Moldbug. You can argue about which of (a) and (b) are primary, but trying to blame muh big business [or (((muh Jews)))] for the literal insanity of flooding the world with four billion Africans is not going to cut it.

Certain people *do* benefit from it.
For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.
Big business - The Economist type people - benefit from it. It grinds down wages, puts up rents, gives them cheap servants, scrubbers and prostitutes and overall puts the 'lower orders' in their 'place'.

However, it doesn't take too much of an Einstein to work out that benefitted group 1 is absolutely, totally antithetically opposed to benefitted group 2.

Alas, only one outcome is inevitable from such a huge clashing of tectonic plates, and it will be none the too pretty.

Just open your eyes a little, and do a little internet research.
As a start, I recommend reading the twitter feeds of two entirely odious characters. The first is Jonathan Portes. The second is Philippe Le Grain.
To say that they are not *fanatically* in favor of Britain abolishing all border controls and thus, in theory at the very least, giving ALL 4 billion potential Africans the 'right' to move in on Britain is an understatement.
Oh, and if you think that the aforementioned mad-monks were lunatics, charlatans, howling gibberish in the desert, you are severely mistaken. Portes was New Labour's top econ man - or should that be conman. Le Grain was EU head honcho's - now Goldman Sachs head honcho Baroso's economic policy chief.
And, oh, I've got to add if you really want to know what the political class thinks, as opposed to says about immigration, read - and weep - at their in-house journal The Economist magazine.

The man made changes to their environment are caused buy themselves. Not good to cut all the trees down in any climate. That is what took down the Aztecs and other north and south American civilizations.

Japan doesn’t have much non-Japanese immigration, neither does China. Or South Korea. Why? Those are advanced, First World nations for the most part. Certainly compared to Gambia.

White women basically just don’t like most of their male compatriots, and thus like Angela Merkel invite the Merkel Youth right on over. Look at Sweden, both Feminist Central and Cuck invasion central.

“Reporting in the April issue of PLoS Genetics, the researchers found that modern day Jews can attribute about 3% to 5% of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans,”

This is bullshit. If this were true than why has no Sub Saharan African admixture popped up in the DNA results of any Hollywood Jewish celebrities who publicly took a DNA test and revealed the results on television. No Negro blood popped up in the DNA ancestry results of Larry David, Gwyneth Paltrow, Robert Downey Jr., Dustin Hoffman, etc.

“White Hispanics” are a lot more likely to have Sub Saharan African admixture than Jews.

Sorry to burst your bias anti-Jewish bubble, but Jews would not be considered Black by Jim Crow one drop rule standards.

I understand that your schtick is owed to a “there but for the grace of God go I” motive; if Jews first, Sicilians next. Consider that my response to joining Sicilians and Jews at the hip is to give you both the heave-ho.

That said, nobody said Jews were black. Jews have been talking shit on everyone’s “racial purity” for generations now, so turnabout is fair play. Lots of Jews have some really precious notions, in this regard.

As for tests, you do understand that it’s a fast-moving field, and the shelf-life of results isn’t very long? And that shitty TV shows from a shitty popular culture are not the way to determine these things?

Aryan = Blond/Blonde

More of your genius. Why note cite a Jewish-directed romcom as evidence?

My understanding is that all manner of govts and NGOs shower myriad forms of birth control on Africans – which they don’t use.

Nonsense. They use condoms. To carry water, as rubber bands, as balloons, etc.

Perhaps you could expand on your paragraph that I quoted? I’m interested in a more detailed take.

Heh, I’m economically illiterate. I just know from observation that Somebody’s Gotta Be In Charge. It’s just the way the world works. And if capitalists are in charge, they will sell the rope to hang us. That’s how capitalism works.

It’s also how Narratives work – something is always dominant. If it’s not Nationalism, it’ll be something else.

If you could be more specific about what you’re asking, maybe I could give you a better answer, but you shouldn’t expect much.

Personally, I like the idea of tariffs, closing the borders, removing criminal aliens, bankrupting employers of criminal aliens, etc. The usual iSteve stuff.

There's a lot of cui bono talk on the alt right - and some of it is accurate, or at least valid - but this issue is the ultimate proof that such analysis doesn't get us to the nub of the problem. The truth is that no-one benefits from black people outbreeding everyone else and taking over the world. The fat Somalian who I used to pass every day on my way to work with his bum out, chewing Qat and shouting at people was not providing cheap labour to anyone.

What we are dealing with is the consequence of (a) a fringe cult becoming the dominant religious ethos of our time through a series of historical accidents and (b) democratic/republican systems creating chronically bad incentive structures i.e. Moldbug. You can argue about which of (a) and (b) are primary, but trying to blame muh big business [or (((muh Jews)))] for the literal insanity of flooding the world with four billion Africans is not going to cut it.

No.

Certain people *do* benefit from it.
For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.
Big business – The Economist type people – benefit from it. It grinds down wages, puts up rents, gives them cheap servants, scrubbers and prostitutes and overall puts the ‘lower orders’ in their ‘place’.

However, it doesn’t take too much of an Einstein to work out that benefitted group 1 is absolutely, totally antithetically opposed to benefitted group 2.

Alas, only one outcome is inevitable from such a huge clashing of tectonic plates, and it will be none the too pretty.

For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.

Possibly, except that the policies of the Tories are pretty much identical. And Labour has had its teeth kicked in the past two elections. So they haven't actually benefitted. They destroyed Britain and they're still unelectable.

There's a lot of cui bono talk on the alt right - and some of it is accurate, or at least valid - but this issue is the ultimate proof that such analysis doesn't get us to the nub of the problem. The truth is that no-one benefits from black people outbreeding everyone else and taking over the world. The fat Somalian who I used to pass every day on my way to work with his bum out, chewing Qat and shouting at people was not providing cheap labour to anyone.

What we are dealing with is the consequence of (a) a fringe cult becoming the dominant religious ethos of our time through a series of historical accidents and (b) democratic/republican systems creating chronically bad incentive structures i.e. Moldbug. You can argue about which of (a) and (b) are primary, but trying to blame muh big business [or (((muh Jews)))] for the literal insanity of flooding the world with four billion Africans is not going to cut it.

Look.

Just open your eyes a little, and do a little internet research.
As a start, I recommend reading the twitter feeds of two entirely odious characters. The first is Jonathan Portes. The second is Philippe Le Grain.
To say that they are not *fanatically* in favor of Britain abolishing all border controls and thus, in theory at the very least, giving ALL 4 billion potential Africans the ‘right’ to move in on Britain is an understatement.
Oh, and if you think that the aforementioned mad-monks were lunatics, charlatans, howling gibberish in the desert, you are severely mistaken. Portes was New Labour’s top econ man – or should that be conman. Le Grain was EU head honcho’s – now Goldman Sachs head honcho Baroso’s economic policy chief.
And, oh, I’ve got to add if you really want to know what the political class thinks, as opposed to says about immigration, read – and weep – at their in-house journal The Economist magazine.

I think there needs to be a lot more examination of how the American environmental movement went from essentially all in for zero population growth as recently as the 90s to essentially open borders today. The huge, 'strings attached' donation to the Sierra Club in the late 90s was one factor and push, but definitely not the only one.

Opposition to a population focus within environmentalism came way before Gelbaum. The first big proponent of the argument: “population control is just a distraction – our real focus should be on technology and consumption levels…” was Barry Commoner in 1970.
Commoner was an early adversary of Paul Ehrlich, and he did probably more harm than anyone in the period 1970-85 (then Julian Simon appeared) towards pushing population stabilization out of the consensus. Commoner was definitely the first omen of the white privilege/white guilt shaming since his rhetoric often talked of (paraphrase), ‘throwing poor people of the 3rd world overboard while western nations still live in decadence’.

- could she understand, that this was a big step for catholic theology, to abandon the ages-old Moses 9, 7 imperative - Be fruitful and multiply!" - -?

And it's not only Catholic theology - there's lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Plus: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is improving the reproductive rates whereever they are active in medical help for Africa, because by concentrating on financing medical help, they - want it or not - improve birthrates.

I just can't see, that they get this - even though Steve Sailer pointed out lately, that Bill Gates was able to think things over, if something that he organizes doesn't have the right outcome.

And it’s not only Catholic theology – there’s lots of Evangelical traditionalists active in Africa as well.
And hardly anybody within the Christian churches openly protests all this.

Mr. Kief,

have you heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200 before?

The basic thesis of the memorandum was that population growth in the least developed countries (LDCs) is a concern to US national security, because it would tend to risk civil unrest and political instability in countries that had a high potential for economic development.

Canadian Madeline Weld has taken a serious look at the International Feminist Movement. Her findings are most revealing: “[T]he Vatican, and various allies,…categorize as racism any arguments for limiting population growth and any reasonable objections to unlimited immigration….[F]ar too many people are intimidated into silence by this form of intellectual terrorism.

"Nationalists worry about demographic change, and think it can be altered by policy. They don’t worry as much about climate change, and if they do, doubt the extent to which it can be altered by policy."

I will start worrying about global warming if the temperature on Christmas eve in Calgary for example ever gets warm enough that you can walk the streets that day without wearing a coat, just a short sleeve shirt like as if you were celebrating Christmas in Phoenix.

“I will start worrying about global warming if the temperature on Christmas eve in Calgary for example ever gets warm enough that you can walk the streets that day without wearing a coat, just a short sleeve shirt like as if you were celebrating Christmas in Phoenix.”

I would swap Calgary for Winnipeg, during winter Calgary can experience brief mild spells because of warm Pacific winds blowing over the Rockies called Chinooks. Similar to the Santa Ana winds in southern California, though in California the winds blows in from the inland desert area.

You mean the group that voted 53% for Trump? Brilliant solution. Without white women , you'd be looking at President Hillary. You'd do better to remove the franchise from any other 'minority' group, barring perhaps Chinese and Philippinos.

Certain people *do* benefit from it.
For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.
Big business - The Economist type people - benefit from it. It grinds down wages, puts up rents, gives them cheap servants, scrubbers and prostitutes and overall puts the 'lower orders' in their 'place'.

However, it doesn't take too much of an Einstein to work out that benefitted group 1 is absolutely, totally antithetically opposed to benefitted group 2.

Alas, only one outcome is inevitable from such a huge clashing of tectonic plates, and it will be none the too pretty.

For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.

Possibly, except that the policies of the Tories are pretty much identical. And Labour has had its teeth kicked in the past two elections. So they haven’t actually benefitted. They destroyed Britain and they’re still unelectable.

Britain - or England if Scotland goes its own way - will have a non ethnically British non-white majority electorate sometime around the 2050s. No further in the future than the miner's strike was in the past.Non whites vote consistently something like 70 to 80% for Labour.Also consider that each and every year the number of committed Tory voters decreases by natural die-off.

You mean the group that voted 53% for Trump? Brilliant solution. Without white women , you’d be looking at President Hillary. You’d do better to remove the franchise from any other ‘minority’ group, barring perhaps Chinese and Philippinos.

For starters, the British Labour Party has benefitted mightily from it. Ultimately, it will ensure permanent Labour Party rule.

Possibly, except that the policies of the Tories are pretty much identical. And Labour has had its teeth kicked in the past two elections. So they haven't actually benefitted. They destroyed Britain and they're still unelectable.

Think of the long term.

Britain – or England if Scotland goes its own way – will have a non ethnically British non-white majority electorate sometime around the 2050s. No further in the future than the miner’s strike was in the past.
Non whites vote consistently something like 70 to 80% for Labour.
Also consider that each and every year the number of committed Tory voters decreases by natural die-off.

If Britain had proportional representation Labour would be in clover. But they don't. They have first past the post voting. In the last election the Tories won just over a third of the vote but won an absolute majority in Parliament. In Britain it all depends on how fragmented the vote is on either side. Technically it's quite possible for a party to win a quarter of the vote and win the election, if the opposition vote is sufficiently fragmented. If the Greens were to surge and the Liberal Democrats were to revive the Tories could stay in power for decades (especially if UKIP dies which seems highly likely).

Britain - or England if Scotland goes its own way - will have a non ethnically British non-white majority electorate sometime around the 2050s. No further in the future than the miner's strike was in the past.Non whites vote consistently something like 70 to 80% for Labour.Also consider that each and every year the number of committed Tory voters decreases by natural die-off.

Non whites vote consistently something like 70 to 80% for Labour.

If Britain had proportional representation Labour would be in clover. But they don’t. They have first past the post voting. In the last election the Tories won just over a third of the vote but won an absolute majority in Parliament. In Britain it all depends on how fragmented the vote is on either side. Technically it’s quite possible for a party to win a quarter of the vote and win the election, if the opposition vote is sufficiently fragmented. If the Greens were to surge and the Liberal Democrats were to revive the Tories could stay in power for decades (especially if UKIP dies which seems highly likely).

If Britain had proportional representation Labour would be in clover. But they don't. They have first past the post voting. In the last election the Tories won just over a third of the vote but won an absolute majority in Parliament. In Britain it all depends on how fragmented the vote is on either side. Technically it's quite possible for a party to win a quarter of the vote and win the election, if the opposition vote is sufficiently fragmented. If the Greens were to surge and the Liberal Democrats were to revive the Tories could stay in power for decades (especially if UKIP dies which seems highly likely).

Tony Blair's master plan wasn't quite as fool-proof as he thought.

Sorry, but many many people don’t seem to have a grasp of the *sheer scale* of the demographic racial turnover tsunami which will overwhelm Britain by mid century.

As an example, I very very much doubt if the Greater London population, which will top 12 millions by then, will even be 5% ethnically British by descent.

Sorry, but many many people don’t seem to have a grasp of the *sheer scale* of the demographic racial turnover tsunami which will overwhelm Britain by mid century.

I agree absolutely. Britain is doomed.

My point was that in the short term, and even in the medium term, it's by no means certain that Labour will gain the political advantages they expected. The policies of Labour and the Tories are pretty much identical. The Tories are every bit as traitorous as Labour. The political end result might be total fragmentation. This is especially so if the Muslims eventually decide they'd do better with their own political party. Under the British electoral system they could win a very substantial number of seats in the areas they demographically dominate.

Once they have the numbers why would Muslims vote Labour when Labour supports socially liberal policies which Muslims (rightly) despise?

In political terms Labour's long-term ascendancy is far from assured. In demographic terms the country is headed for ruin.

Sorry, but many many people don't seem to have a grasp of the *sheer scale* of the demographic racial turnover tsunami which will overwhelm Britain by mid century.

As an example, I very very much doubt if the Greater London population, which will top 12 millions by then, will even be 5% ethnically British by descent.

Sorry, but many many people don’t seem to have a grasp of the *sheer scale* of the demographic racial turnover tsunami which will overwhelm Britain by mid century.

I agree absolutely. Britain is doomed.

My point was that in the short term, and even in the medium term, it’s by no means certain that Labour will gain the political advantages they expected. The policies of Labour and the Tories are pretty much identical. The Tories are every bit as traitorous as Labour. The political end result might be total fragmentation. This is especially so if the Muslims eventually decide they’d do better with their own political party. Under the British electoral system they could win a very substantial number of seats in the areas they demographically dominate.

Once they have the numbers why would Muslims vote Labour when Labour supports socially liberal policies which Muslims (rightly) despise?

In political terms Labour’s long-term ascendancy is far from assured. In demographic terms the country is headed for ruin.

Contact Steve Sailer

Email me at SteveSlr *at* aol*dot*com (make the obvious substitutions between the asterisks; you don’t have to capitalize an email address, I just included the capitals to make clear the logic — it’s my name without a space and without the vowels in “Sailer” that give so many people, especially irate commenters, trouble.)

iSteve Panhandling

Steve Sailer

I always appreciate my readers’ help, especially monetary. Here’s how you can help:

First: You can use PayPal (non-tax deductible) by going to the page on my old blog here. PayPal accepts most credit cards. Contributions can be either one-time only, monthly, or annual.

Second: You can mail a non-tax deductible donation to:

Steve Sailer
P.O Box 4142
Valley Village, CA 91617-0142

Third: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring “subscription” donations.) Note: the VDARE site goes up and down on its own schedule, so if this link stops working, please let me know.

The IRS has issued instructions regarding Bitcoins. I’m having Coinbase immediately turn all Bitcoins I receive into U.S. dollars and deposit them in my bank account. At the end of the year, Coinbase will presumably send me a 1099 form for filing my taxes.

Payments are not tax deductible.

Below are links to two Coinbase pages of mine. This first is if you want to enter a U.S. dollar-denominated amount to pay me.

Fifth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrAT aol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.

Sixth: if you have a Chase bank account (or even other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it’s StevenSailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.

Here’s the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: “You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps.” You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphoneapp (Android and iPhone — the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google’s free Gmail email service. Here’s how to do it.